Subject:
|
Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 30 May 2004 04:40:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
808 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Thomas Stangl wrote:
| |
John wrote:
| |
| |
| |
that they didn’t fully earn it
themselves. But they have made sacrifices (the 1,000s of innocents killed),
|
They did not make sacrifices; they were “sacrificed”.
|
Calloused and insensitive semantics. Par for the course.
|
Actually, in this case, you’re wrong and (shudder), Scott is right.
This is NOT semantics.
“Made sacrifices” pertains to the Iraqi people as a whole. “Were sacrificed”
pertains to the ones actually killed.
|
Well, if they were sacrificed, then by whom to whom?
| |
HUGE difference, don’t try to pave it over in your
rah-rah-Bush-can-do-no-wrong-in-Iraq-claptrap.
|
You know, pro-Bush folk would probably be a lot less “rah-rah” if the Left
weren’t so virulently hateful of Bush as a person, much less as a politician.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) Again, this isn't new; it existed with Clinton, too, though the positions were often reversed, and I'd argue that there was much more "yeah, he's a slimeball sex fiend" admission on the Left during the Lewinsky matter than there is acceptance (...) (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) Actually, in this case, you're wrong and (shudder), Scott is right. This is NOT semantics. "Made sacrifices" pertains to the Iraqi people as a whole. "Were sacrificed" pertains to the ones actually killed. HUGE difference, don't try to pave it (...) (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
