 | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | (...) Does anyone know why? Lets see; no right to fair jury, no right to language translator, no right to legal counsel, and you can be imprisoned in any country the court chooses. This applies to civilians as well as military personel. I don't (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | | (...) Define "fair jury". (...) That'd be a première, in UN instances... Anyway, why are you complaining? It's not as if the judges were to speak anything other than English among themselves! :-) (...) Please elaborate. What are the guaranties for (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Ya, you're right. What the US is doing to the terrorism detainees, as you describe above, is shocking and disgusting. Thanks for reminding us. Oh wait, you're talking about the ICC, aren't you? I got confused for a minute (...) It does? Not if (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) My understanding is that "enemy comabatant" is a term coined by the Dubya administration as a convenient way of referring to people that the admin found inconvenient. Since no war has been formally declared, the US can (nominally) claim not to (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | Interestingly, none of these objections seem to bother other participating countries, and it didn't bother Clinton any either (last time I checked he was a red blooded american also, and hey at least he showed signs of life) -- it bothers Shrub!!! (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Spencer Nowak
|
| | | | (...) Show me hard evidence that proves we are only there for oil. otherwise i will regard you as just another empty-headed anti-war protester jumping on the no blood for oil bandwagon for lack of a better objection.... (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | (...) My current proof is the currently skewed state of affairs that leans our govt. very heavily in the direction of multinational corporations. These corporations are stealing our collective wealth through tax breaks, reporting fraud, stock fraud, (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) So, I wonder why you require "hard" evidence for one side of the coin, but such amazingly soft (ie clearly fabricated) evidence for the other. (...) What better objection could there be? You are essentially claiming that blood is a fine (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Just sit tight, Chris--after Spencer spends about six quarts of his own, then the market will probably run dry for him. Dave! (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Spencer Nowak
|
| | | | (...) I could say the same... why do we need "hard evidence" to go to war(which, by the way, we have given saddam ample chances to avoid by simply telling us what he has) and "soft evidence" to stay home and let a US hating dictator get wmds? (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Are you out of your mind? That would be like me saying: 1. I believe Spencer plans to acquire a gun (though I have no evidence of this) 2. I believe that Spencer dislikes me intensely. Therefore 3. I am justified in lauching a mammoth (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) People like Saddam Hussein? Emphatically YES! JOHN (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Yes, because a UN weapons inspector says something, that makes it true. That's the same bunch that includes members who tipped off the Iraqis that inspections were about to happen so that they could shift stuff around. (...) You know, for (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Thank you for saying so! I have about had it with RM's silly conspiratorial blathering. JOHN (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, you're welcome, but I wish you would have left at least one more sentence of what I posted, *the very next one* in fact: "Ashcroft (and his bunch) actually ARE out there undermining liberty" This is true, you can't argue it, so maybe (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) I snipped it because it's another debate. JOHN (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | (...) Sorry Larry, you're thinking is too simplistic in my view. You ascribe everything to stupidity and not everything works that way. What is their motive? Or had you forgotten that most people have motives for the things that they do? And what? (...) (21 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | (...) "Do not ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -Richard Feynmann (...) The French are upset because of Dubya's stOOpid actions. I'd describe his "diplomacy" as perhaps the worst I've ever seen (and this from a (...) (21 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Wasn't it Napoleon Bonaparte that said something like this? (...) It cannot be that he rolls out of bed each morning and says to himself: "God, I am so stupid I think I'll declare war today." He has to have motive. He has to think there is (...) (21 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Spencer Nowak
|
| | | | | | (...) Hypothetical Situation: Let ! =a group of terrorists Let @ =an autocratic country with wmds, built or in progress. Also, they dont have a single resource anyone would want Let # =a country that the 2 above hate with every fiber of their being (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | Did you not read how Bush and Blair both admit they cannot connect AQ and SH? It's on the white house's own pages. So your hypothetical is just that -- entirely imaginary. And I have yet to see where Iraq has these fearful weapons of mass (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) hehe maybe not for long: (URL) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) (URL) didn't because it's too early to know whether there's anything to this. Maybe it's a false alarm... Of course with our great powers of fakery, all part of the Vast Conspiracy(tm), it wouldn't take more than a day or two to knock up a 100 (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | Fox is hardly a cite I consider without bias -- I'll wait until at least a few other sources join in confirming the story. And while I don't claim any conspiracy exists to make Saddam appear to be a bad guy (I mean, I accept that he is a bad guy), (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Modified hypothetical: Let a = whacky terrorist group run by a psychopath. Let b = nuke-bearing dictatorship run by a guy who likes living the good life and pretty evil, but not plausibly insane. Let c = big country that they both hate. So, a (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Spencer Nowak
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:> (...) Not necessarily nukes. they know c would annihilate them for that. however a terrorist group *could* come up with chem or bio weapons themselves, and therefore using them would hurt c (...) (21 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | (...) Something we agree on. Given the "problems" with our itelligence, why would you rather err on the side of war? Kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out? Perhaps you can explain it better... -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) Because one way people don't die. Inspections and containment was working. The other way people die--bombing and fighting. There had better be a physical "smoking gun" for me to consider the very option of thinking about starting a war. And if (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) False. It was doing no such thing. (...) False again. Tell that to the Kurds, er, Shiites, er Chaldeans he gassed/starved/paved over during the peace Hussein's imposition of his will on his oppressed people cost how many hundreds of thousands (...) (21 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
