Re: Giant anti-war demonstration in Melbourne

From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Mon Feb 17 2003 - 21:24:17 MST

  • Next message: Damien Broderick: "God, abortion and stem cell research"

    Me:

    >>He had a massive army and after he swallowed
    >>Kuwait he could have taken over Saudi Arabia in
    >>just a few days if he wanted to and he certainly
    >>wanted to, the only reason he didn't is fear of the
    >>USA, and if he knew the president was listening
    >>to advise from you he would have no fear and
    >>the world would be a sadder and more dangerous
    >>place today.

    "Samantha Atkins" <samantha@objectent.com>

    > The evidence of this massive army was doctored. Sorry if you are
    > not informed of this.

    100% certified grade A Baloney. The same huge army that conquered Kuwait
    could have done the same thing to Saudi Arabia in a matter of days and
    undoubtedly would have if not for the USA.

    > Let me get this straight. Saddam is the ONLY leader who wants
    > WMD? You must be kidding.

    No, you do not have that straight and no, I am not kidding. What I said was
    " Saddam is the only leader in the world who wants weapons of mass
    destruction, invaded his neighbors twice, has a chance to control the
    world's supply of oil and has actually used chemical weapons on his own
    people and on others."

    Sorry about your reading comprehension problem.

    > We were fully behind the Iraq/Iran war if that is part of what
    > you are referring to. We helped build up the military strength
    > of Iraq and encouraged them.

    I don't give a damn because it has no relevance regarding what the present
    policy should be.

    >We have used chemical weapons and have conducted
    >experiements on our own citizens. Does this mean
    >we should be invaded?

    I don't give a damn because nobody is able to do so.

    >We would like to control the world's supply of oil.
    >Should we be invaded?

    I don't give a damn because nobody is able to do so.

    >The supposed gassing of the Kurds is actually under
    >some contention as it was during the Iraq/Iran war
    >and the actual gas used judging from the examination
    >of the victims appeared to more likely be of the
    >type employed by Iran.

    I'm curious, does being a apologist for a butcher like Saddam ever make you
    uncomfortable?

    > Frankly, I find the US position and intentions in this matter
    > thoroughly sickening and utterly reprehensible.

    Yes. We've all heard you say that many many times, but I don't recall one
    word of criticism about Iraq, I guess you think it's a clear cut case of
    good verses evil. If so then I'm on the side of evil and proud of it.

       John K Clark jonkc@att.net



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Feb 17 2003 - 21:29:24 MST