Thanks, it's been fun.
I agree with your last post. I'm just trying to keep you away from the thinking of the right - black/white, good/evil, pure/unpure, with nothing in between. And also a tendency to jump down the throat of anyone who dares to suggest that any aspect of american or British policy could possibly be suspect.....
As for the rest:
Map reading - never said India was in Europe, please read again
Counting - huh? I addressed your post.....
War monger - I dont know what comes in the middle. Obviously I think (in retrospect) Clinton didn't do enough.
At the same time, nothing else other than invasion has ever been suggested by the Bush camp.
ebyfied posts - :-D
PPD - well duh.
Last word is yours if ya want it.
Cheers,
Tony
Flame » in reply to A Valid Point
And so we let this thread die of old age.......
The whole thread (92 posts)
- A question for Mark Eby: What is your definition of 'terrorist'?
- Someone who DELIBERTATELY targets non-combatants.
- That's George Bush. Read it again. (n/t)
- Your Definition Is Pretty Good
- Swinging intellectually (and wildly)
- Uh, lemme try: someone with a rag on their head? (n/t)
- My definition is a bit simpler.
- Opposed to.............?
- re: My definition is a bit simpler.
- Differences
- re: Differences
- A seven year old responds
- You're right, as far as it goes.
- Old Trick
- Another Old Trick
- Same Old Anti-war Rubbish
- re: Another Old Trick
- Maybe the point is...
- Same Old Dem Lies And Stupid Posturing
- And what would the same war have cost ten years from now?
- I didn't say there was a better way.
- Maybe the point is...
- Another Old Trick
- re: You're right, as far as it goes. (n/t)
- good bump (n/t)
- Old Trick
- You're right, as far as it goes.
- A seven year old responds
- re: Differences
