Re: [WAR]: not about WMD

From: Michael Wiik (mwiik@messagenet.com)
Date: Fri Apr 25 2003 - 21:57:30 MDT

  • Next message: Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: my objection to the Doomsday argument"

    dehede011@aol.com wrote:
    > It was entirely predictable that if we won in Iraq that the left wing

    Who you calling left wing? Me or ABC? I hope I am more of a libertarian.
    But I agree our quick victory shows God favors Bush.

    > would fall back regroup and go into its patented strategy perfected over the
    > past 200 years. Rethink, rephrase &relabel, the shift from the concrete to
    > the abstract. The opening salvo is to fire so many convoluted salvos that no
    > one will ever be capable of answering them all.

    You mean like you just did? (I dunno leftist theory and acknowledge you
    as the expert)

    > Just having General Gas Attack of Sadaam's Army threaten to gas us if
    > we entered Iraqi territory was sufficient reason to believe Iraq had the WMDs
    > to back up his threat.

    Again I agree the veracity of the Iraqi leadership has been above reproach.

    > The fact that he had gone to great lengths to evade
    > UN sanctions to have Scud missiles with an illegal range was enough to
    > justify our thinking he didn't intend arming them with water balloons.

    He had some homemade missles that exceeded the allowable range by a few
    miles. I'd like to see a source discussing the legality of existing
    Scuds. Maybe they should call it 'The Ten Mile War'

    > I notice you quoted ABC news. Mike, I am truly ashamed of you. Any
    > one of us that listened to ABC news during the war could have collected a
    > pithier Anti-American statement from Peter Jennings than the one you used.
    > For shame.

    ABC is only freer to speak now that they lost the CIA contract to CBS.
    (see Skolnick).

            -Mike

    -- 
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 25 2003 - 22:03:17 MDT