Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 12 Jul 2003 03:29:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
264 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
We know he has/had WOMD (we gave most of them to him, idiot politicains from
before, but that is a whole seperate issue.)
|
I’m not clear why this is unrelated -- it seems very related to me, and also
an obvious example of the U.S.’ very poor foreign policy as a whole. The
other issue is shelf-life: it is my understanding that most of this stuff has
lost its usefulness and that this is a fact well understood by all. So again,
the “imminent” threat just evaporates before our eyes.
BTW, do you care to name those other idiot politicians?
|
All of them. I hope in my lifetime all the politicians are gone and we reinstate
the use of representatives.
| |
| |
Does it surprise me that the Bush team fabricated half the story, no. Every
politican throughout history has done the same thing to garner public
support. Today in the world of mass media they can’t really get away with
stuff like that anymore.
|
I’m not prepared to let anyone off so easily -- not on a matter of great
national and international importance.
|
Yeah but when over half the population believes the story and now “feels safe”
you might as well bide your time.
| |
If we can roast a president over the
coals for a private sexual affair, I think we can then roast a president for
causing a war under at least several false pretenses.
Whether he gets away with it remains to be seen. How did McCarthy pay for
his crimes against the state?
| |
But why does idiot politicians doing what politicians do, make people think
there was not even the slightest threat at all?
|
The distinguishing word here is “imminent.” Absent an “imminent” threat a
peace option was preferred by everyone except those that profit from war.
|
Ok the isolationist theory. Fair enough. I think it would be nice if the U.S. at
least followed a consistant foriegn policy. If we started liberating countries
under the rule of dictatorships that would be nice. If we delcared world
neutrality, stopped giving handouts, stopped telling people what to do ‘cause
were the U.S., and simply nuked any country that threatens us that would be fine
too. As long as the policy is consistant, of course that would mean giving up
stealing other countries’ oil.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
