 | | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
| | | | (...) The Sons of Saddam seem to have forgotten that trite statement. Or perhaps, "He who lives be the sword, dies by the sword." So, yes, it's trite, but it also kinda backfires against David since it can also be used to explain why it happened. I (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?) —John Neal
| | | | | (...) Yeah, I was called in on that characterization as well by Dave! What I meant basically was that sometimes violence can beget peace. How about it is good to resist against evil, even if that means going to war. But I think we are of the same (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
| | | | | (...) Saddam wasn't particularly unstable. His actions are fairly predictable, in fact. I suppose any dictatorship is inherently unstable, but that is hardly a valid excuse in and of itself (see: all the other dictatorships that the U.S. has no (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | |
