 | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) What do you mean Clinton shouldn't be impeached [1]? :) --Mike. [1] Impeached, Impaired... how about Imappled or Imgraped? Aren't these words a little unfair to the rest of the fruit community? (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Unlikely now.... Whenever the going gets tough, he bombs someone to take attention away. :o) And of course, our Foreign Office continues to phallate (sp?) American foreign policy. (deliberate pun) Though I do believe Saddam should be stopped, (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Saddam should have been assasinated a long time ago, whether by us directly or some group we put on the job. Clinton should have bombed Iraq long before now. Amazingly convenient how he timed it, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) Actually, the terrorist leader should have been tortured to death long ago. Moz (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Well....probably. (...) Depends if you wish to take everything on faith regarding "weopans of mass destruction" from just *one* inspector. Sure there is a lot of stalling and attempts to block their legitimate work.... The timing is the only (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Those are real missiles, and could hurt many innocent as well, not some sort of "cigars" which causes only one person (the woman) crying [with pleasure] Selçuk (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Collateral damage is unfortunate, admittedly. I've always felt that a country's people have at least some responsibility for their leadership, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Now I don't think that he's a great guy or anything, but who are you to pass judgement on him. People living in Bagdad will probably say the same about Clinton. We cannot say that he is a good or bad leader, the people in his country are the (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) Oh goody, I thought you only e-mailed this to me. Saddam is an evil tyrant who poses a threat not only to his own people but to those of neighboring countries. He and seemingly his entire regime are a bunch of lying maniacal bastards and I (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) sort of (...) Not always true. Saddam was not democratically elected. He has ruthlessly oppressed the people and opposition has been crushed. Those films we see of people fervently supporting Saddam have long been discounted, as they have been (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
(...) I found that out by accident aswel. Apperently, Free Agent emails when I reply to the newsgroup. Some option I played with, I'm sure. But which one.... (...) <snip> (...) I won't argue with you about that, for they sum up my feelings pretty (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.foreign.policy (was: lugnet.religion.flame)
|
|
(...) I happen to know that some people in the US would agree. and later wrote again: (...) Wrong. I think it is up to us. I think this because as a society we have taken on the burden of opposing tyranny world-wide. I support this stance, but (...) (26 years ago, 21-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
