subject. Serves me right for getting snippy without having the topic
of the snippiness in front of me. But look
"If we are successful in Iraq"
Conditional clause. Let A="we are successful in Iraq"
"we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if
you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under
assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
Subject = we
Verb = strike
Predicate = "the base...of the terrorists...on 9/11." I don't believe
those ellipses do any damage to meaning.
Let B="we strike a blow at the base of the terrorists" (optional
qualifer re 9/11)
The sentence boils down to If A then B. I see no mention at all of
"Middle East." I do see mention of "iraq" in the premise (A).
Dana
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:13:21 -0700 (PDT), Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The full quote is:
> "If we're successful in Iraq," he said, "we will have
> struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if
> you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who
> have had us under assault now for many years, but most
> especially on 9/11."
>
> Makes a big difference.
>
> -sm
>
>
>
> --- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > is the following a true statement?
> >
> > Cheney, in a "Meet the Press" interview, had
> > described Iraq as "the
> > geographic base of the terrorists who had us under
> > assault now for
> > many years, but most especially on 9-11."
> >
> > Yes, that is Cheney not Bush, but that is really
> > splitting hairs,
> > kinda like saying yeah well there were contacts,
> > they just didn't
> > cooperate.
> >
> > ::rolls eyes::
> > Dana
> >
> > On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 13:16:03 -0400, Nick McClure
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Not that I recall, Bush claimed that Saddam
> > supported terrorists, which he
> > > did, he gave $20,000 to the family of any
> > Palestinian suicide bomber.
> > >
> > > He allowed groups to operate out of remote areas
> > of Iraq, in the opening
> > > months of the war US Forces destroyed and went
> > into a few terrorists camps
> > > killing hundreds of terrorists and even discovered
> > the plans and ingredients
> > > to make risen, but the chemicals and their
> > ingredients were never linked
> > > back to Saddam, but he still let them stay there.
> > >
> > > Bush was very clear to never state that Saddam or
> > Iraq helped plan or had
> > > any direct involvement in the 9/11 attacks.
> > >
> > > But they always hinted at Iraq and Terrorist
> > connections, the media did
> > > their part to spin that into Iraq-Al Qaeda links
> > and thus Iraq-9/11 links.
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > > From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 12:20 PM
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: Re: 9/11 Commission to Cheney - You're
> > still wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > agreed. But the issue arises when half the
> > viewership of Fox news
> > > thinks 9/11 is the reason for the US presence in
> > Iraq. Also, don't
> > > have time to look right now but at the time the
> > news stories about
> > > that came out didn't they cite statements by Bush
> > to that effect? I
> > > will look later if nobody else has in the
> > meantime.
> > >
> > > Dana
> > >
> > > They are the 9/11 commission, not the Al
> > Qaeda/Iraq link commission.
> > >
> > >________________________________
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
