1
   

AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP! At war for years now

 
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Oct, 2004 05:02 pm
14,000 REFUGEES ALONE BILL.

Sheesh.

And - anyone can accept that you will bully whom you will - but nobody (except some Americans) think that you have a RIGHT.

They are not paraphrases. You said you would nuke a whole region. Dress it up how you like, and back pedal how you may.

On this I think you ARE nuts, actually.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Oct, 2004 05:15 pm
dlowan wrote:
14,000 REFUGEES ALONE BILL.

Sheesh.

And - anyone can accept that you will bully whom you will - but nobody (except some Americans) think that you have a RIGHT.

They are not paraphrases. You said you would nuke a whole region. Dress it up how you like, and back pedal how you may.

On this I think you ARE nuts, actually.


"paraphrases" had to do with the Nationality preference accusation, which I hope we've put to rest, not death-toll. I've back peddled not at all. I have no problem with the balance of your response. If you recall, last time I agreed with you when you suggested I feel it is "a right, bordering on responsibility". I still feel that way... and you still think I'm nuts. <shrugs> No surprises there. :wink:
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Oct, 2004 05:43 pm
Bill - I know - when you are made to look at what you say, that you would not say "1 American life is worth 1,000 Afghan lives".

However, when you make ridiculous suggestions like nuking the Afghan mountains - this is what it boils down to. This is the REALITY of these chest thumping responses.

Look at it - face on.

Thank god, even the worst president I think you guys have ever had (though I may well be wrong - he may only be the worst you've had since you've been so powerful) is not so drunk on American power as you seem to be sometimes.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Oct, 2004 06:07 pm
dlowan wrote:
Bill - I know - when you are made to look at what you say, that you would not say "1 American life is worth 1,000 Afghan lives".

However, when you make ridiculous suggestions like nuking the Afghan mountains - this is what it boils down to. This is the REALITY of these chest thumping responses.

Look at it - face on.
Oh, but I am darlin. However many Human's died in the blast and subsequent radiation would be a far smaller number than those who will die because guys like Kim Jong IL know we'd never do such a thing. If he knew we would, he'd change his tune (that is my honest opinion). His death toll is in the millions, already, because he knows we wouldn't do such a thing. I understand you see madness to my method... but there is a method to my madness.

dlowan wrote:
Thank god, even the worst president I think you guys have ever had (though I may well be wrong - he may only be the worst you've had since you've been so powerful) is not so drunk on American power as you seem to be sometimes.
Good disclaimer you put in there. :smile: I have little doubt Teddy Roosevelt would at least consider Nuking someone over a 9-11... And James Knox Polk would have long ago Nuked more than a few I imagine (as a campaign promise he said he'd expand our nation from ocean to ocean... then did :wink:).
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Oct, 2004 06:53 pm
Well, chest thumper, this Thumper and you will just have to disagree.

Bloody cheesehead. So glad yer finger ain't on the button...or whatever it is.

Oh, by the way, would you, therefore, have supported, in principle, a pre-emptive nuclear strike by Saddam, had he had them, to save Iraqi lives from the invasion?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Oct, 2004 08:55 am
dlowan wrote:
Well, chest thumper, this Thumper and you will just have to disagree.
A foredawn conclusion on subject like this, when I discuss them with folks as kind and decent as you. Brings to mind the age old question: If you could cure all the world's disease by killing a single, innocent child; could you kill that child? Could you?

dlowan wrote:
Oh, by the way, would you, therefore, have supported, in principle, a pre-emptive nuclear strike by Saddam, had he had them, to save Iraqi lives from the invasion?
There is no possibility of that saving lives... and again, the nationality means little too me. In that situation; the US would have little choice but to respond in kind... or else our weapons would cease to be a credible threat (which, as it happens, is precisely our problem now. The nuts don't believe we have the stomach for the dirty work... and they're mostly right. Idea)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 04:33:38