Big Kahunas

In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:

Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 07:22:29 -0800 "C J Campbell" wrote:


"mike regish" wrote in message
news:gRkAb.315222$275.1065859@attbi_s53...
| You are so out of touch. Tell me. Bush keeps saying that war is a last
| resort. If he meant that, then why didn't he at least give the inspections
a
| chance.

Inspections were given a chance for more than 10 years. How much of a chance
did you want? Meanwhile, Hussein was murdering millions of his own people,
financing terrorist attacks all over the world, and continuing to threaten
his neighbors. I wonder how many people had to die before you thought action
was necessary?

So you have felt sorrow for the Iraqi people. It seems you have a bigger
place in your heart and mind for them then your own fellow americans who's
views oppose yours. Unfortunately most (all ?) oil rich nations have the
same problems. Despots.



However, my point stands. I find the constant anti-Bush, anti-American, off
topic postings from you, Hotze, Dighera and others to be every bit as vile
as you think my postings are. I don't think Hotze in particular has ever
posted on topic. You might want to think about that before you threaten to
plonk people that you consider to be "contemptuous, arrogant, and hateful."

Anyone resorting to labeling fellow americans anti-american when those
fellow americans have opposing views is certainly irony in its purest
form. America is about dissent and opposing views and the right to express
those views. It's not about having special areas cordoned off for Bush
supporters while any Bush opposition is banned to some distant, off-camera
corner.

Or even rich.

Of course he was pointing out the fact that the Bush bandwagon gathers those
scared souls who are worried about their pots of money. Huddling around
a pot of money as we are marched into a dangerous future seems empty to me.


I did not start this thread. I did not post on it until the thread had been
running for several days. If I am offensive, it is deliberately so -- you
deserve it. If polite people remain silent while you keep up your constant
stream of poison, it is not because they agree with you. I am old and no
longer have any reason to be ashamed over anything. Somebody has to stand up
to hateful bullies like you. Whether you plonk me or not, I will continue to
do so.

I've had a chance to read some of your postings and it seems to me that you
need a fresh perspective on who's hateful. I find your posts to be filled
with exactly the things you are accusing the poster for. The tone and
quantity of your postings clearly paints a mean picutre. But I am willing
to accept your views and know that it's healthy to be able to understand
opposition. Usenet is about discourse. And I hope we always will have it
available to us.


R. Hubbell

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 10:25:44 -0800, R. Hubbell wrote:

I don't think there's enough polarization for that.

while we are at it: this one just came in on a mailinglist:

http://www.google.com/search?q=miserable+failure

*hihi*

martin

--
http://www.declareyourself.com/fyr_candidates.php
http://www.subterrane.com/bush.shtml

Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:

Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel

You obviously don't recognize sarcasm when you read it.

I'll explain for you and I'll try to use small words.

Bob's statement was a desperate, yet feeble attempt to take a simple
statement about a specific set of circumstances and turn it into a
generalization. (That means he thinks I feel that way about all situations
in all circumstances-ok?) Since it made no logical sense at all, and I
realized that said statement was not worth rebutting, I wrote the response
you see. It's the same thing you are trying to do
with your response.

So if I write "Yeah Jeff. That's what I think," will you now understand that
I really don't think that at all, or should I explain it some more for you?

Do you get it now?

Jeez...

mike regish

"Jeffrey Voight" wrote in message
...
So, the U.N. was totally wrong in threatening .mil action? I suppose
that parents shouldn't discipline children and criminals are simply
misunderstood.

Jeff...

mike regish wrote:
Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...

In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:


Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel

Yeah Jeff. That would be the logical conclusion.

Do you get it, or should I explain again?

mike regish

"Jeffrey Voight" wrote in message
...
Ah, I get it. Your sarcasm was lost on me since it tasted so much like
your prior posts.

So, now you're agreeing that .mil action was the appropriate response?

Jeff...

mike regish wrote:
You obviously don't recognize sarcasm when you read it.

I'll explain for you and I'll try to use small words.

Bob's statement was a desperate, yet feeble attempt to take a simple
statement about a specific set of circumstances and turn it into a
generalization. (That means he thinks I feel that way about all
situations
in all circumstances-ok?) Since it made no logical sense at all, and I
realized that said statement was not worth rebutting, I wrote the
response
you see. It's the same thing you are trying to do
with your response.

So if I write "Yeah Jeff. That's what I think," will you now understand
that
I really don't think that at all, or should I explain it some more for
you?

Do you get it now?

Jeez...

mike regish

"Jeffrey Voight" wrote in message
...

So, the U.N. was totally wrong in threatening .mil action? I suppose
that parents shouldn't discipline children and criminals are simply
misunderstood.

Jeff...

mike regish wrote:

Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...


In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:



Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing
to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel

In article 5KqAb.41541$_M.188141@attbi_s54, "mike regish"
wrote:

Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

It is certainly disingenuous to complain about President Bush
not allowing enough time for the inspectors when you apparently
would rather have given Iraq infinite time and wouldn't answer the
question about how much time would have been enough.

I'm just trying to figure out if you are someone who believes
no war is ever justified. Your statements, including the
sacrastic one, certainly are consistent with that.




mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:

Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel



--
Bob Noel

And yours are consistent with somebody who prefers to be in a constant state
of war.

You obviously see only what you want to see. There's an old saying I like
and I'm going to practice here. "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes
your time and annoys the pig."

mke regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article 5KqAb.41541$_M.188141@attbi_s54, "mike regish"
wrote:

Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

It is certainly disingenuous to complain about President Bush
not allowing enough time for the inspectors when you apparently
would rather have given Iraq infinite time and wouldn't answer the
question about how much time would have been enough.

I'm just trying to figure out if you are someone who believes
no war is ever justified. Your statements, including the
sacrastic one, certainly are consistent with that.




mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:

Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing
to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel



--
Bob Noel

I'm just trying to figure out if you are someone who believes
no war is ever justified. Your statements, including the
sacrastic one, certainly are consistent with that.



Nah, just no war in which the US prevails.

Don
--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

In article t5uAb.442477$HS4.3482390@attbi_s01, "mike regish"
wrote:

And yours are consistent with somebody who prefers to be in a constant
state
of war.

you haven't been paying attention.



You obviously see only what you want to see.

yeah, obviously.


There's an old saying I like
and I'm going to practice here. "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It
wastes
your time and annoys the pig."

I notice you are still ducking the question. Or that
just something that I want to see...

--
Bob Noel