Subject:
|
Re: Arrogance floats amongst the stars...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 12 May 2004 15:58:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
482 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Don Heyse wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
>
> [another big snip]
>
> > The invasion of Iraq is the root reason why this civilian was brutally
> > murdered.
>
> That's true, but not for the reasons you think. (Do you think? you
> write a great deal, but I get the impression you don't stop to think
> about it first.)
Nice.
>
> 1. With Saddam in charge, he wouldn't have gone there.
>
> 2. If the US were not there, then those terrorists would be free to
> concentrate on larger targets here, instead of one civilian in Iraq.
Ahh, back to the 'US needs to be in Iraq to curtail terrorism towards the US'
card.
Please tell me the following, in case my 'thinking processes' as you alluded to,
weren't 'on' at the time--How many Iraqis hijacked planes on 9/11 again?
After two years of occupation, how many thousands of tonnes of WoMD did you find
in Iraq that were ready to be dropped on American Soil within 45 minutes, as
Bush and Co. lead us to believe?
And just what was that Blix guy doing before the US showed up anyway?
Grasshopper, me thinks that 'think' is something that we should all endeavour to
do. Try a little discernment while you're at it.
Dave K
-who sometimes does write 'off the cuff'--'must learn to govern my passions' is
an appropriate statement for that.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Arrogance floats amongst the stars...
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: [another big snip] (...) That's true, but not for the reasons you think. (Do you think? you write a great deal, but I get the impression you don't stop to think about it first.) 1. With Saddam in (...) (21 years ago, 12-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
32 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
