Current Events » in reply to Actually, no

The whole thread (21 posts)

• Let me see if I have this straight... - Larry J - 12/4/2002 10:43:31 AM
  • One little problem - Robert - 12/4/2002 1:33:02 PM
    • Actually, no - Larry J - 12/5/2002 2:12:59 PM
      • Actually, still yes (or is it logically 'no'?) - Robert - 12/5/2002 4:15:41 PM
        • Re: Threatening WMD retaliation is not a threat of WMD retaliation . . . ? - D. Spires - 12/5/2002 9:05:08 AM
          • Not reading my post is reading my post? - Robert - 12/5/2002 9:37:19 AM
            • Re: I go by what I see in the news, Robert . . . - D. Spires - 12/5/2002 11:31:06 AM
      • Actually yes - Tony - 12/5/2002 2:57:54 PM
        • Nope - Larry J - 12/5/2002 3:08:42 PM
          • Re: Nope - gbaikie - 12/5/2002 6:47:36 PM
    • Re: context - Raoul - 12/4/2002 6:36:58 PM
  • I love it. They don't really care. "We have no WMD's, and if you piss us off anymore, we will nuke ya." lol@them and their defenders.§ (n/t) - ebnelson` - 12/4/2002 10:52:02 AM
    • Time to break out the bunker busters. - Scott - 12/4/2002 11:24:18 AM
      • Blood thirsty bunker busters. - Lindy - 12/4/2002 3:10:11 PM
        • Relax! I'm going deer hunting in a few weeks. - Scott - 12/5/2002 3:37:03 PM
          • Watch out for those d--n deer ticks! ;-) (n/t) (n/t) - SDAI-Tech1 - 12/5/2002 9:11:18 AM
        • A couple of points. - ebnelson - 12/5/2002 3:11:59 PM
        • Re: Oh, yes -- and about Usama bin Laden . . . - D. Spires - 12/5/2002 9:10:18 AM
        • Re: Rubber & Glue . . . - D. Spires - 12/4/2002 3:32:24 PM
          • far too many bloody rebels -- far too few bloody causes left in the world (n/t) - Lindy--I agree n/t - 12/4/2002 5:05:08 PM
      • Bunker busters - Tom Brosz - 12/4/2002 1:44:53 PM