 | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) 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...
|
|
(...) "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...
|
|
(...) 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...
|
|
(...) 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...
|
|
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...
|
|
(...) 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...
|
|
(...) (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...
|
|
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...
|
|
(...) 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...
|
|
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...
|
|
(...) 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)
|
