::snicker:: I am waiting for someone to say wait this is PEACEFUL warmongering :) As in so many other things, I disagree, though. Peace at all costs can be far right :) look at the Vichy regime in WWII France. But I am pulling your chain, playing devil's advocate and making you question your categories, that's all. Slightly left of center feels about right though I am not sure about your reasons for putting me there <g>
Dana Andy Ousterhout writes: > Left is the other direction from my leanings :-). > > Just as a point of reference, Reckless Warmongering is far right, just as > peace at all costs is the far left. As with most matters, I believe that > the balance is in the middle. Lets be reckless with peace or peaceful > warmongering. Ah. Much better. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 1:14 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: More on Iraq's non-existant WMDs > > > maybe. Depends what left is. I am not sure reckless warmongering is > actually conservatism :) But I know you don't agree that it's reckless > warmongering :) so we don't have to argue the point. > > Dana > > Andy Ousterhout writes: > > > I figure you for basically against the war, balanced, but leaning left. > > I'll look at anything new. Most of what's out there is same same. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 12:21 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: More on Iraq's non-existant WMDs > > > > > > I am not sure what you perceive my position to be. I am not sure I have > > one, apart from massive doubt and skepticism, personally. I did however > > agree with Chretien when he said Saddam is surrounded and neutralized so > > that goal is already met; what's the point of invading? > > > > My short answer: I will look at anything. Believe is another story. > > > > Dana > > > > Andy Ousterhout writes: > > > > > Howie, > > > Interesting, but besides the Powell transcript, not really anything new. > > And > > > even that could be taken out of context. In fact, I would be surprised > if > > > anyone who was making public statements wasn't privately challenging the > > > evidence in order to protect their integrity. > > > > > > The good new about all of this conjecture is that we will either find > > > weapons or not. If we don't, then many folks, including anyone running > > for > > > election, is likely to strongly question how we made that mistake and we > > all > > > need to insure that answers are found. > > > > > > At this junction, an interesting question is : if we do find WMD, how > > many > > > of you will reverse your positions and say that we were right to invade > > > Iraq? > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 9:35 AM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: More on Iraq's non-existant WMDs > > > > > > > > > http://slate.msn.com/id/2083760/ > > > > > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,968603,00.html > > > > > > > > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/31 > > > /MN163599.DTL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
