 | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | (...) If you humbley say so yourself? ;-) (...) Anarchy? Where are you getting your information? (...) Now I must really question your sources, because what you have just said could not be further from the truth! Virtually all if not all of the (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: A few things... —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | Stating something is wrong and *proving* it is wrong are entirely different things, John. I don't like SA's rantings, but I also don't like the bile that often spouts from your fingers into this group. At this point, I call Put Up or Shut Up - if (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A few things... —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) WHAT????? You seem to have conveniently forgotten the war in Iraq was primarily to remove the "threat" of nuclear weapons and the (apparent) harbouring of terrorists, as part of the "war on terrorism". THAT is why Americans (and others) are (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) And not just farce, but expressly known to be false, months before Dubya invaded Iraq unprovoked. Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Look, even Clinton acknowledged that SH would need to be deposed eventually. Removing him was the bottom line, even without the threat of WMDs. His mere existence was a "green light" in my mind. JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A few things... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) Clinton didn't propose an unprovoked invasion in defiance of the UN, and he didn't endorse the removal of inspectors before their job was done, and he certainly didn't advocate the murder of 100,000 Iraqi civilians. If removing him was the (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A few things... —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | | | (...) Mmmmm. This green light in your mind that allows you to do awful things with dubious grounds, and with scant care for human life. Not the green light of well thought out, systematically supported, equitable and respected authorisation I think, (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) What you seem to have never internalized is that we went into Iraq for one reason, and one reason only-- to depose SH's evil regime. We issued an ultimatum for him leave or we would make him. He didn't, and we did. He was the threat, he was (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) Please point me to where Resolution 114 mentions Iraqi freedom. That may (possibly, eventually) be a consequence, but it is NOT what Americans are dying for. ROSCO (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Rubish! If it was agreed he had complied with 1441, he would have been able to stay in power. Anyhow, why start with him whilst training the (URL) Uzbek security forces> and bank-rolling (URL) Israeli belligerence>? (URL) Funded by Washington (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Correct. Because then we would have been satisfied that he didn't have WMDs at his disposal to possibly provide to terrorists. <snip off-topic material> (...) No, Scott, it is not "clear" by any stretch of the imagination. That is your (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) What WMD's???? But John, what about those poor Iraqis and their thirst for "Freedom"? (...) You need to read Plan of Attack. (...) Even if true, he still posed no threat to the USA(?) (...) Yep, and he got them from Washington. (...) What (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) The ones the UN believed that he hadn't destroyed. (...) What about them? (...) Figures you'd cite someone like Woodward. <yawn> (...) If? That, again, is merely your uninformed opinion. (...) I don't care if he got them from Uranus, it (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) ...based on a case made by the USA. (...) Bush trusted him, why don't you? (...) No John. It is a question directed at you. I shall try again: Can you list any terror acts against the USA which SH sponsored? (...) What is the difference (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) <snipping> (...) Yes. Point? <snip> (...) Who knows? I know he aided and abetted terrorists. Whether they were the actually ones involved in terrorism against the US is anyone's guess. The point is that he was a friend of terrorism and an (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) OK; so you can't list any then. (...) So you're guessing now? (...) No doubt the Uzbeks say the same about the USA. (...) So basically, you spent billions and killed tens of thousands to help Israel hold on to illegally obtained land? (...) (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) It's all a guessing game. We played it safe and took him out for good-- something that should have occured in '91. (...) No doubt we weren't talking about them. Start a new thread. (...) To help Israel so that they wouldn't be forced to defend (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Yeah. Sure. What does a few thousand dead matter. (...) **yawn** (...) Actually John, I was highlighting your rank hypocrisy. Morally, I don’t believe it is correct for you to accuse others of murdering civilians without looking in your own (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | I know you are, but what am I? I'm not listening! Lalalalala.... I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you. ...and, the ultimate retort: Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. Sorry, I just was trying to raise the level of (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | You’ve certainly raised your level of debate. ;) Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: A few things... —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | (...) Translation: "I know you are, but what am I?" -->Bruce<-- No, don't bother to respond, I'm not listening, lalalalalalalalala....... :-) (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A few things... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | OK. I shall use mime then: Gotcha! Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A few things... —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) I always found quoting MP was the ultimate retort, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!! WMMV JOHN (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
