John H wrote:
Again, Doug, it ain't over 'til it's over.


Unless somebody blows up the whole world, it ain't over even then.

You are correct in your statement that we should have dealt with Iraq many years
ago.


Bush Sr *did* but he didn't finish the job. IMHO he was hoping to do
more business with Saddam.

DSK

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 16:56:57 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
Hizbollah Draws Vast Pro-Syrian Crowds in Beirut

43 minutes ago

By Nadim Ladki

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Hundreds of thousands of flag-waving Lebanese flooded
central Beirut Tuesday for a pro-Syrian rally called by Hizbollah.



Hundreds of thousands?
Hehehe.

That would have been a good time to bomb downtown Beirut. Once again,
ill-conceived diplomacy will cost American lives down the road.


ABC, on the radio, said, "Tens of thousands..."

Pretty soon they'll be using scientific notation to describe the number.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On 8 Mar 2005 09:27:51 -0800, wrote:


NOYB wrote:

That would have been a good time to bomb downtown Beirut. Once
again,
ill-conceived diplomacy will cost American lives down the road.

Boy, that's broad minded........

Are you, like Chirac, rooting for Hezbolah also?


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:27:21 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 11:34:11 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:
Hizbollah Draws Vast Pro-Syrian Crowds in Beirut

43 minutes ago

By Nadim Ladki

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Hundreds of thousands of flag-waving Lebanese flooded
central Beirut Tuesday for a pro-Syrian rally called by Hizbollah.



Hundreds of thousands?
Hehehe.

The Guardian has it as 500,000. Rather impressive considering Lebanon has
a population of under 4 million.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...849731,00.html

Soon it'll be, "Five times ten to the thirty-second power."


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:50:04 -0500, DSK wrote:

And up until last week, Syria has been very friendly and cooperative
towards the Bush Administration and vice-versa.


NOYB wrote:
Last week? Horsepoop.

Nope, that's the truth. Bush & Cheney can be very cozy with terrorist
supporting states such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, when it suits their
own purposes.

And unfortunately, that's the truth.

... You obviously don't read much.

Nope, actually I read a fair amount... of course, I don't put much stock
in carefully selected & edited & spun versions of anybody's political
tub-thumping, whereas you swallow every bit of that you can.

DSK

In other words, Doug, you really think Rather ought to keep his job, correct?

John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 16:50:17 -0500, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
Again, Doug, it ain't over 'til it's over.


Unless somebody blows up the whole world, it ain't over even then.

You are correct in your statement that we should have dealt with Iraq many years
ago.


Bush Sr *did* but he didn't finish the job. IMHO he was hoping to do
more business with Saddam.

DSK

Humble opinions are something we all have.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
You seem to forget, the North Koreans did not build nukes... and announce
it to the world, while defying us to do anything about it... on Clinton's
watch.



NOYB wrote:
Horsepoop. They were building them all along using the money Clinton
gave them. They didn't develop them overnight.


Not according to the inspectors.

Actually, there were some indications of duplicity by the North Koreans
during the '90s, but it was partially over missiles and partially over
material which the IAEA removed.

If North Korea developed nukes before, it was probably on Bush Sr's watch.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron.asp


So Clinton gave them the funding that they needed to further a nuke program
that was started years earlier?

On 8 Mar 2005 13:21:48 -0800, wrote:


NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:

That would have been a good time to bomb downtown Beirut.
Once
again,
ill-conceived diplomacy will cost American lives down the
road.

Boy, that's broad minded........

Can you think of a more effective way to surgically remove from
the
face of
the Earth 100,000 anti-US terrorists?

Are you saying that every person in the area was a terrorist?
How
do
you know this?

Just the ones shouting "Death to America".

Ah, so you are now saying that only part of them were terrorists?
And
the only terrorists there were shouting "death to America"? And
further, are you stating that every single person who shouts "death
to
America, is, indeed a terrorist? How so? Please explain how you've
come
to the conclusion that a terrorist must be anti-American, and that
every person anti-American must be a terrorist.


We can sort that out when sifting through the rubble.

Yeah, great. You've certainly shown your intelligence. It sounds as if
you want to blow everyone up that isn't white, or American, or
Republican, or does not live in Naples, FL. Sounds like you need one of
those pickup trucks with a rebel flag in the rear window and a gun
rack.

Yes, basskisser, NOYB *has* certainly demonstrated his intelligence. And, he did
it without making a personal attack.

Do you get my drift?


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
You seem to forget, the North Koreans did not build nukes... and announce
it to the world, while defying us to do anything about it... on Clinton's
watch.



NOYB wrote:
Horsepoop. They were building them all along using the money Clinton
gave them. They didn't develop them overnight.


Not according to the inspectors.

Actually, there were some indications of duplicity by the North Koreans
during the '90s, but it was partially over missiles and partially over
material which the IAEA removed.

If North Korea developed nukes before, it was probably on Bush Sr's watch.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron.asp


So his policy by definition was effective.


Why was it effective? Because he paid them off to keep them from
announcing their nuke program until he left office? Yeah...sure...that's
effective policy.


???
Do you really believe this?


I don't believe in paying incentives to countries to keep them from pursuing
WMD. You obviously see nothing wrong with it...and neither do most members
of Congress.

From the Syria Accountability Act:


(c) AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO SYRIA AND LEBANON- The President is
authorized to provide assistance to Syria and Lebanon under chapter 1 of
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.)
(relating to development assistance), if the President--

(1) makes the certification described in subsection (d);

(2) determines that substantial progress has been made in negotiations
aimed at achieving--

(A) a peace agreement between Israel and Syria; and

(B) a peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon; and

(3) determines that the Government of Syria is strictly respecting the
sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of
Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon
through the Lebanese army throughout Lebanon, as required under paragraph
(4) of United Nations Security Council Resolution 520 (1982).

(d) CERTIFICATION- The President shall transmit to the appropriate
congressional committees a certification of any determination made by the
President that--

(1) the Government of Syria does not--

(A) provide support for international terrorist groups; and

(B) allow terrorist groups, such as Hamas, Hizballah, the Popular
Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine--General Command to maintain facilities in Syria;

(2) the Government of Syria has withdrawn all Syrian military,
intelligence, and other security personnel from Lebanon;

(3) the Government of Syria has ceased the development and deployment of
ballistic missiles and has ceased the development and production of
biological and chemical weapons; and

(4) the Government of Syria is no longer in violation of United Nations
Security Council Resolution 661 or a subsequent relevant United Nations
resolution.

(This method of diplomacy *DOES NOT WORK*.)

"John H" wrote in message
...
On 8 Mar 2005 09:27:51 -0800, wrote:


NOYB wrote:

That would have been a good time to bomb downtown Beirut. Once
again,
ill-conceived diplomacy will cost American lives down the road.

Boy, that's broad minded........

Are you, like Chirac, rooting for Hezbolah also?

Actually Chirac is on our side with the Lebanon/Syria issue. I just can't
figure out why yet.