|
|
 | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) Ah, yes. Dr. Rice's famous "smoking gun mushroom cloud" argument. Sorry, but that's not sufficient. Hussein did not have and was not actively seeking a nuclear weapons program, so any argument based on that premise is invalid. It may be the (...) (18 years ago, 26-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) If that's true, then the appropriate course of action must be to err on the side of preserving liberty. Instead, in the fear-soaked aftermath of 9/11, we saw the Congress tripping over itself in its abdicate its Constitutional responsibility, (...) (18 years ago, 26-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) Look at it as an investment in future security. Calculate the cost of a nucular (sic) detonation on one of our cities. (...) I don't think that the troops have a problem with this, so why on earth do the dems and the left have one? (...) We (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) Democrats aren't, with a few noted exceptions, calling for immediate withdrawal, so your question is misleading. Still, the benefits of departure would be many: among them, we'd stop wasting billions of dollars each month; we'd get our troops (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) I don't see an upside of leaving at this time, but I see a big downside. What's the rush? I think it is driven more by hatred for President Bush than it is for a desire for the overall security of the US. Because the war is a policy of (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
