re: This is a fact?

Mary Anne — 5/13/2004 12:12:20 AM (archived)

This is asserted as a fact in the article you linked to:

Any withdrawal from Iraq will not bring safety from enemy action inasmuch as they attacked Manhattan and Washington DC nearly two years before OIF.

There were no Iraqis involved in the attacks on Manhattan or DC.

This has been part of the problem in the case for a war against Iraq from the outset.

The whole thread (15 posts)

Belmont Club: "Reductio Ad Absurdum" - Tom Brosz - 5/12/2004 5:25:52 PM
- Wretchard is brilliant - Gary - 5/13/2004 6:28:08 AM
- Missing a certain little something, perhaps? (n/t) - Tony - 5/12/2004 6:24:18 PM
  - Aw, crap. - Tom Brosz - 5/12/2004 9:07:27 PM
    - Not equatable - Tony - 5/13/2004 1:46:37 PM
    - re: This is a fact? - Mary Anne - 5/13/2004 12:12:20 AM
      - re: This is a fact? - Pete Stanley - 5/13/2004 6:01:40 AM
        
        Convinced by what evidence? (n/t) - alcaray - 5/13/2004 10:47:32 PM
        
        re: Convinced by what evidence? - Pete Stanley - 5/14/2004 7:34:22 AM
        
        That's not evidence. It is a refutation of evidence to the contrary. - alcaray - 5/14/2004 5:37:12 PM
      - This is a fact - Tom Brosz - 5/13/2004 4:23:16 AM
        
        re: This is a fact - Mary Anne - 5/13/2004 6:52:34 PM
        
        re: This is a fact - Pete Stanley - 5/14/2004 5:12:54 AM
        
        Syria and Iran - Tom Brosz - 5/14/2004 7:19:28 AM
      - re: This is a fact? - gbaikie - 5/13/2004 1:07:36 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (15 posts)