| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Cost of War 8/17/05
The totals:
1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net |
What is your point?
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net |
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:27:20 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net Doug, it's nice to see you didn't add in the extra hundred thousand plus from the John Hopkins study. A little realism is a nice thing. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD |
Amen Bert, what is his point? Obviously he just wanted us to know that
He's against the war and that he's a left winger. "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... What is your point? "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net And this is what their price brought: .... the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty. .... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens. .... nearly all of Iraq's 400 courts are functioning. .... the Iraqi judiciary is fully independent. .... on Monday, October 6 power generation hit 4,518 megawatts-exceeding the prewar average. .... all 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open, as are nearly all primary and secondary schools. .... by October 1, Coalition forces had rehab-ed over 1,500 schools - 500 more than scheduled. .... teachers earn from 12 to 25 times their former salaries. .... all 240 hospitals and more than 1200 clinics are open. .... doctors salaries are at least eight times what they were under Saddam. .... pharmaceutical distribution has gone from essentially nothing to 700 tons in May to a current total of 12,000 tons. .... the Coalition has helped administer over 22 million vaccinations to Iraq's children. .... a Coalition program has cleared over 14,000 kilometers of Iraq's 27,000 kilometers of weed-choked canals which now irrigate tens of thousands of farms. This project has created jobs for more than 100,000 Iraqi men and women. .... we have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and over two-thirds of the potable water production. .... there are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000 by year-end. .... the wheels of commerce are turning. From bicycles to satellite dishes to cars and trucks, businesses are coming to life in all major cities and towns. .... 95 percent of all prewar bank customers have service and first-time customers are opening accounts daily. .... Iraqi banks are making loans to finance businesses. .... the central bank is fully independent. .... Iraq has one of the worlds most growth-oriented investment and banking laws. .... Iraq has a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years. .... satellite TV dishes are legal. .... foreign journalists aren't on 10-day visas paying mandatory and extortionate fees to the Ministry of Information for "minders" and other government spies. .... there is no Ministry of Information. .... there are more than 170 newspapers. .... you can buy satellite dishes on what seems like every street corner. .... foreign journalists (and everyone else) are free to come and go. .... a nation that had not one single element - legislative, judicial or executive - of a representative government, now does. .... in Baghdad alone residents have selected 88 advisory councils. Baghdad's first democratic transfer of power in 35 years happened when the city council elected its new chairman. .... today in Iraq chambers of commerce, business, school and professional organizations are electing their leaders all over the country. .... 25 ministers, selected by the most representative governing body in Iraq's history, run the day-to-day business of government. .... the Iraqi government regularly participates in international events. Since July the Iraqi government has been represented in over two dozen international meetings, including those of the UN General Assembly, the Arab League, the World Bank and IMF and, today, the Islamic Conference Summit. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs today announced that it is reopening over 30 Iraqi embassies around the world. .... Shia religious festivals that were all but banned, aren't. .... for the first time in 35 years, in Karbala thousands of Shiites celebrate the pilgrimage of the 12th Imam. .... the Coalition has completed over 13,000 reconstruction projects, large and small, as part of a strategic plan for the reconstruction of Iraq. .... Uday and Queasy are dead - and no longer feeding innocent Iraqis to the zoo lions, raping the young daughters of local leaders to force cooperation, torturing Iraq's soccer players for losing games, or murdering critics. .... children aren't imprisoned or murdered when their parents disagree with the government. .... political opponents aren't imprisoned, tortured, executed, maimed, or are forced to watch their families die for disagreeing with Saddam. .... millions of longsuffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror. .... Saudis will hold municipal elections. .... Qatar is reforming education to give more choices to parents. .... Jordan is accelerating market economic reforms. .... the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian -- a Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace. .... Saddam is gone. .... Iraq is free. .... President Bush has not faltered or failed. |
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
... What is your point? They have names, in case you didn't notice. |
"Dan J.S." wrote in message
... And this is what their price brought: These are all civil improvements that were none of our business to be involved with. |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Dan J.S. wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net And this is what their price brought: ... the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty. ... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens. Ahh, today's talking points from the BushLies Administration. Got them down pat, eh, Danno? I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Dan J.S. wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Dan J.S. wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net And this is what their price brought: ... the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty. ... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens. Ahh, today's talking points from the BushLies Administration. Got them down pat, eh, Danno? I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... So what? I found your list interesting only in that it showed that we're paying to rebuild much of what we destroyed, and some years from now, the Iraqis will have what infrastructure and facilities they had before we bomed them. Big woop. actually most of this did not exist under Saddam... you may be thinking of our rebuilding of Germany after most of the large cities were leveled... we did not do that in Iraq... |
"Dan J.S." wrote in message ... I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... Canada is not one of them. Canada's mission to Iraq is located in Jordan. Too damn risky to have it in Iraq. Jim |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim Carter wrote: "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... Canada is not one of them. Canada's mission to Iraq is located in Jordan. Too damn risky to have it in Iraq. Jim And, of course, whatever diplomats get a hardship posting to Iraq travel under armed guard everywhere they go in Iraq, since even the might US military forces cannot make the country "safe," not even for those traveling the short distance from the Baghdad airport to the "green" zone. Mission accomplished. |
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:41:09 -0400, Jim Carter wrote:
"Dan J.S." wrote in message ... I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... Canada is not one of them. Canada's mission to Iraq is located in Jordan. Too damn risky to have it in Iraq. Geez, don't take Dan to literally. All his "facts" come from an email that made the rounds a year or so ago. http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/combatend.asp |
Harry,
You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Dan J.S. wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Dan J.S. wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... The totals: 1,853 American soldiers, 194 Coalition soldiers, and approximately 23,589 to 26,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed in Iraq from the beginning of the war and occupation to August 14. American soldiers killed from Aug 5-14: Sergeant Brahim J. Jeffcoat, 25; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Specialist Kurt E. Krout, 43; Spinnerstown, Pennsylvania | Lance Corporal Chase J. Comley, 21; Lexington, Kentucky | Staff Sergeant Ramon E. Gonzales Cordova, 30; Davie, Florida | Specialist Anthony N. Kalladeen, 26; Purchase, New York | Private First Class Hernando Rios, 29; Queens, New York | Private First Class Nathaniel E. Detample, 19; Morrisville, Pennsylvania | Specialist John Kulick, 35; Harleysville, Pennsylvania | Specialist GennaroPellegrini Jr., 31; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Sergeant Francis J. Straub Jr., 24; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Staff Sergeant Ryan S. Ostrom, 25; Liberty, Pennsylvania | Specialist Miguel Carrasquillo, 25; River Grove, Illinois | Sergeant 1st Class Michael A. Benson, 40; Winona, Minnesota | Lance Corporal Evenor C. Herrera, 22; Gypsum, Colorado | Specialist Rusty W. Bell, 21; Pocahontas, Arkansas | First Lieutenant David L. Giaimo, 24; Waukegan, Illinois | Specialist Brian K. Derks, 21; White Cloud, Michigan | Staff Sergeant Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35; Lebanon, Tennessee | Specialist Gary L. Reese, Jr., 22; Ashland City, Tennessee | Sergeant Shannon D. Taylor, 30; Smithville, Tennessee | Specialist Toccara R. Green, 23; Rosedale, Maryland. Sources: US Department of Defense, www.icasualties.org, The New York Times, www.iraqbodycount.net And this is what their price brought: ... the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty. ... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens. Ahh, today's talking points from the BushLies Administration. Got them down pat, eh, Danno? I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... So what? I found your list interesting only in that it showed that we're paying to rebuild much of what we destroyed, and some years from now, the Iraqis will have what infrastructure and facilities they had before we bomed them. Big woop. |
Harry Krause wrote:
So what? I found your list interesting only in that it showed that we're paying to rebuild much of what we destroyed, and some years from now, the Iraqis will have what infrastructure and facilities they had before we bomed them. Big woop. Your US taxpayer dollars at work. You pay to bomb 'em you pay to re-build. Who benefits...besides the defense contractors & Haliburton? |
Juan Valdez wrote:
Harry, You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "your are an..." Smithers..aren't you one of the motley crew who pile on another poster here for similar mistakes? |
"thunder" wrote in message ... On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:41:09 -0400, Jim Carter wrote: "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... Canada is not one of them. Canada's mission to Iraq is located in Jordan. Too damn risky to have it in Iraq. Geez, don't take Dan to literally. All his "facts" come from an email that made the rounds a year or so ago. http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/combatend.asp Most of them seem legit. Snopes has this listed as undetermined, but the few links they provide agree that most if not all of these are in fact true. |
Don't know if I was part of that motley crew, but I am glad you jumped on me
for such a stupid mistake. I wish I could blame it on my spell check, it might have been a brain fart or multi-tasking, but none the less, that is one stupid mistake. "Your" doing mankind a favor by jumping on me. ; ) "Don White" wrote in message ... Juan Valdez wrote: Harry, You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "your are an..." Smithers..aren't you one of the motley crew who pile on another poster here for similar mistakes? |
"Dan J.S." wrote in message ... "thunder" wrote in message ... On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:41:09 -0400, Jim Carter wrote: "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... I think over 60 countries established embassies in Iraq too... it's either 58 or 60 -- but around that number... Canada is not one of them. Canada's mission to Iraq is located in Jordan. Too damn risky to have it in Iraq. Geez, don't take Dan to literally. All his "facts" come from an email that made the rounds a year or so ago. http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/combatend.asp Most of them seem legit. Snopes has this listed as undetermined, but the few links they provide agree that most if not all of these are in fact true. .....except that as late as this past spring, our own commanders, on the ground in Iraq, have stated that Iraqi troops and police were woefully unprepared. This directly contradicts what that email said 2 years ago about thousands of Iraqi military protecting their own citizens. |
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Don't know if I was part of that motley crew, but I am glad you jumped on me for such a stupid mistake. I wish I could blame it on my spell check, it might have been a brain fart or multi-tasking, but none the less, that is one stupid mistake. "Your" doing mankind a favor by jumping on me. ; ) Just about everyone makes that mistake once in awhile........there is only one person that consistantly does it (as well as mistakingly using "you're" when "your" is correct) and doing it when he is spell or grammar flaming someone else..... "Don White" wrote in message ... Juan Valdez wrote: Harry, You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "your are an..." Smithers..aren't you one of the motley crew who pile on another poster here for similar mistakes? |
Paul,
Everyone might make that mistake occasionally, but I am glad Don did me a favor by pointing out my fax paux. I would hate for anyone to confuse me with Kevin. "P. Fritz" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Don't know if I was part of that motley crew, but I am glad you jumped on me for such a stupid mistake. I wish I could blame it on my spell check, it might have been a brain fart or multi-tasking, but none the less, that is one stupid mistake. "Your" doing mankind a favor by jumping on me. ; ) Just about everyone makes that mistake once in awhile........there is only one person that consistantly does it (as well as mistakingly using "you're" when "your" is correct) and doing it when he is spell or grammar flaming someone else..... "Don White" wrote in message ... Juan Valdez wrote: Harry, You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "your are an..." Smithers..aren't you one of the motley crew who pile on another poster here for similar mistakes? |
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:18:59 -0400, "P. Fritz"
wrote: "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Don't know if I was part of that motley crew, but I am glad you jumped on me for such a stupid mistake. I wish I could blame it on my spell check, it might have been a brain fart or multi-tasking, but none the less, that is one stupid mistake. "Your" doing mankind a favor by jumping on me. ; ) Just about everyone makes that mistake once in awhile........there is only one person that consistantly does it (as well as mistakingly using "you're" when "your" is correct) and doing it when he is spell or grammar flaming someone else..... "Don White" wrote in message ... Juan Valdez wrote: Harry, You are the one first person I heard who wanted to bomb Iraq. The difference is you wanted to bomb the entire country into dust. The difference is your are an idiot. "your are an..." Smithers..aren't you one of the motley crew who pile on another poster here for similar mistakes? Thanks for changing your quoted text color. Your replies are *much* easier to find and read now. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... What is your point? They have names, in case you didn't notice. Yes, they do have names and faces and they should be honored for their sacrifice and not be used as a political tool. |
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... What is your point? They have names, in case you didn't notice. Yes, they do have names and faces and they should be honored for their sacrifice and not be used as a political tool. I'm not running for public office, you dolt. No political tools involved. I'm simply posting the names of the pawns murdered by your president, whose sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? |
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
Doug,
Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... What is your point? They have names, in case you didn't notice. Yes, they do have names and faces and they should be honored for their sacrifice and not be used as a political tool. I'm not running for public office, you dolt. No political tools involved. I'm simply posting the names of the pawns murdered by your president, whose sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Have you ever thought of attending anger management classes? You seem to be pretty worked up and your agenda sounds politically motivated. |
When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded
reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... What is your point? They have names, in case you didn't notice. Yes, they do have names and faces and they should be honored for their sacrifice and not be used as a political tool. I'm not running for public office, you dolt. No political tools involved. I'm simply posting the names of the pawns murdered by your president, whose sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Have you ever thought of attending anger management classes? You seem to be pretty worked up and your agenda sounds politically motivated. No, Bertie. This is the truth, plain and simple. Your president's list of reasons for Iraq have all turned to vapor. Nothing left but 100% personal reasons for the war, and that qualifies as mental illness. |
Doug,
Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. A classic example was fedral funding for the "Bonior Bike Paths" here in Mich....... The federal guvmint (i.e. the taxpayers) had absolutely no business funding such a localized project. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
Paul,
I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. "P. Fritz" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. A classic example was fedral funding for the "Bonior Bike Paths" here in Mich....... The federal guvmint (i.e. the taxpayers) had absolutely no business funding such a localized project. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But that is all the liebral have left as they head for the cliff like lemmings...... ************************************************** ************* Even Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Kinsley, no fan of the Republicans, has noticed. ``It's true that the Republicans are the party of ideas and the Democrats are the party of reaction,'' he wrote earlier this month. ``Republicans set the agenda, and Democrats try to talk the country out of it.'' Democrats continue to rely on a world view that crumbles under scrutiny. Sifting through Democratic positions on numerous different policies, you find two core beliefs that differentiate their view of the world from that of Republicans. First is the belief that redistributing income is the most important objective of government. Second is the belief that high tax rates don't hurt. These beliefs create two problems for Democrats. The first is that if you assume they're correct you would find the two beliefs lead logically to highly unpopular policies. If equality is so wonderful, one should be willing to increase marginal tax rates in the U.S. on anyone who has an income higher than the median (about $43,000). Tax increases are indeed recommended by left-wing intellectuals. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, for example, recently called for the U.S. to raise taxes as a share of gross domestic product from the current 17 percent to 28 percent -- a 65 percent increase. Good luck to the politician who tries to convince voters of that. http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...ist_hassett&si d=ay_2TYz2crhs ************************************************** *********** "P. Fritz" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. A classic example was fedral funding for the "Bonior Bike Paths" here in Mich....... The federal guvmint (i.e. the taxpayers) had absolutely no business funding such a localized project. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
Yup, the liebrals are all nothing but Lemmings and Borgs. ; )
"P. Fritz" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But that is all the liebral have left as they head for the cliff like lemmings...... ************************************************** ************* Even Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Kinsley, no fan of the Republicans, has noticed. ``It's true that the Republicans are the party of ideas and the Democrats are the party of reaction,'' he wrote earlier this month. ``Republicans set the agenda, and Democrats try to talk the country out of it.'' Democrats continue to rely on a world view that crumbles under scrutiny. Sifting through Democratic positions on numerous different policies, you find two core beliefs that differentiate their view of the world from that of Republicans. First is the belief that redistributing income is the most important objective of government. Second is the belief that high tax rates don't hurt. These beliefs create two problems for Democrats. The first is that if you assume they're correct you would find the two beliefs lead logically to highly unpopular policies. If equality is so wonderful, one should be willing to increase marginal tax rates in the U.S. on anyone who has an income higher than the median (about $43,000). Tax increases are indeed recommended by left-wing intellectuals. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, for example, recently called for the U.S. to raise taxes as a share of gross domestic product from the current 17 percent to 28 percent -- a 65 percent increase. Good luck to the politician who tries to convince voters of that. http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...ist_hassett&si d=ay_2TYz2crhs ************************************************** *********** "P. Fritz" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. A classic example was fedral funding for the "Bonior Bike Paths" here in Mich....... The federal guvmint (i.e. the taxpayers) had absolutely no business funding such a localized project. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
And some pork barrel spending is for projects which *might* have some
usefulness to the public, but which are built by cronies of the legislator who enabled the projects to be funded. Indirectly, the result is bribery. As far as the sexual issue, this is no different than the ways we sometimes diagnose mechanical problems. Start with the simplest things (air, fuel, spark), subtracting reasons one at a time. Eventually, there are no reasons left but the ugliest, like the expensive ignition module, or a president's secret thrills gained by watching those shaky video clips from war zones. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Your understanding of "pork barrel" is as convoluted as the rest of your theory. There are many other reasons that you are not able to understand, including your very unique "sexual fantasy" concept. For what it is worth: Pork barrel (or pork barrel politics) is a derogatory term used to describe government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities. Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriations bills. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... When politicians make policies which have no clear, sane and well-grounded reasons, there is a limited set of conclusions you can come to. It means their decisions were based on bribery (politely called "pork barrel" or "conflicts of interest"), religion, or maladjusted personal fantasies. I'll leave you to choose which apply to Bush. I believe #3 and #2 are the motivations he's most conscious of (and I'm being polite by linking the concept of consciousness to Bush). #1 is most certainly the case as well, although that's more of a motivator for his family, who propped him up for election, for reasons you MUST be aware of without explanation. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, Nope, did very well in school, and stayed awake in class. I just can't imagine anyone receiving sexual gratification from the Iraqi War. Do you get off thinking about it? I sure haven't read anything in the news about Bush and his fantasy life, have you? What is the deal with you and Harry and bizarre sexual fantasies "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in sole purpose is to wage war for his own sexual thrills and financial gain. Doug, I must have missed the news about Bush's sexual thrills, do you know something we don't? I assume you slept through college, eh? |
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But.....none of his reasons have panned out, or even held a drop of water. That leaves only perversion and twisted beliefs. |
Doug,
You mind me of the people who look at ancient artifacts they don't understand and say "This is proof that ancient civilization were visited by space aliens" You are ignoring many other more viable reasons for invading Iraq. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But.....none of his reasons have panned out, or even held a drop of water. That leaves only perversion and twisted beliefs. |
No I'm not. With the *possible* exception of having a base for troops there,
there is NO reason which has made sense. Not one. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, You mind me of the people who look at ancient artifacts they don't understand and say "This is proof that ancient civilization were visited by space aliens" You are ignoring many other more viable reasons for invading Iraq. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But.....none of his reasons have panned out, or even held a drop of water. That leaves only perversion and twisted beliefs. |
and when you look at ancient civilizations, the only explanation which makes
sense is they were visited by aliens. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... No I'm not. With the *possible* exception of having a base for troops there, there is NO reason which has made sense. Not one. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, You mind me of the people who look at ancient artifacts they don't understand and say "This is proof that ancient civilization were visited by space aliens" You are ignoring many other more viable reasons for invading Iraq. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But.....none of his reasons have panned out, or even held a drop of water. That leaves only perversion and twisted beliefs. |
OK. Which of Rove's reasons made sense to you?
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... and when you look at ancient civilizations, the only explanation which makes sense is they were visited by aliens. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... No I'm not. With the *possible* exception of having a base for troops there, there is NO reason which has made sense. Not one. "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Doug, You mind me of the people who look at ancient artifacts they don't understand and say "This is proof that ancient civilization were visited by space aliens" You are ignoring many other more viable reasons for invading Iraq. "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Juan Valdez" wrote in message ... Paul, I agree. My point is there are many reasons Bush went to war against Iraq. You may not agree with his reasons, but the least likely reasons, is Bush was trying to personally profit from the war and/or it meet a sexual fantasy of his. But.....none of his reasons have panned out, or even held a drop of water. That leaves only perversion and twisted beliefs. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com