Subject:
|
Re: A few things...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 27 May 2005 02:53:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2406 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
right from the Whitehouse web site
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050525-3.html#c
So much there--“Invited”--well, I guess it depends on your definition--if I
kick in your door and kill your family, I’ll say I was invited.
|
Won’t work--my family doesn’t have a huge stockpile of oil.
|
What is it that you think we would do with that huge stockpile of oil? Steal
it?
|
Is that a rhetorical question? We are actively engaged in the process of
securing a sovereign nation’s natural resources for our own benefit, and this is
exacerbated by the fact that our hegemonic military presence in that country is
intended to cow neighboring nations into obedience. That’s what we’re doing
with that huge stockpile of oil.
| |
| |
Nor did you supply me with chemical weapons in the 80’s out of a criminally
short-sighted sense of expediency.
|
A lot of countries have them. Not many actually use them. Guns don’t
kill; people do.
|
So you have no objection to North Korea, Iran, and Osama bin Laden acquiring
nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons don’t kill people; people do.
Additionally, we (by which I mean your fellow Conservatives) gave chemical
weapons to Saddam so that he would use them, which makes us complicit in any
deaths resulting from them. If you disagree with this point, then you must
abandon any claims re: Saddam supporting/funding/orchestrating terrorism, since
his knowledge of the terrorists’ intent is only as clear as was our knowledge of
Saddam’s intent to use chemical weapons.
| |
| |
Nor did you all but grant me permission to
invade Kuwait just weeks before I did it.
|
Let’s face it-- SH was an idiot. The guy read the tea leaves all wrong.
This is a guy who presumably had no WMDs, but led the world to believe that
he actually did. A fabrication to which he clung that led to his fall from
power. I’m sure that he didn’t think that the US would have the temerity to
attack despite the misgivings of the UN, which he was well adept at
manipulating.
|
This is the perpetual argument, and it’s perpetually ridiculous, because it
embraces Dubya’s defiance of the UN while condemning Saddam’s defiance of the
UN.
Until you explain why it is okay for our President to defy UN sanctions, then
you must abandon any objections to Saddam’s defiance of them.
| |
| |
Nor did you defy the UN’s wishes and
invade me for defying the UN’s wishes.
|
Oh, look. I just covered that above.
|
Not really. Care to try again?
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A few things...
|
| (...) What is it that you think we would do with that huge stockpile of oil? Steal it? (...) A lot of countries have them. Not many actually use them. Guns don't kill; people do. (...) Let's face it-- SH was an idiot. The guy read the tea leaves all (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
82 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
