I figured that if I added the France option, people would get the what I
thought to be obvious facetiousness, given John's well stated objection to
any preemptive strikes.  (Of course, I don't think that they are preemptive,
but reasonable people can disagree;  thus John and I can CLEARLY disagree!)


Stacy Smith wrote:

> Who says we should attack anybody?
> Stacy.
> At 08:35 PM 11/06/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Who objected to Marc's obvious statement?  The Taliban was put in power
> >people in Pakistan.
> >
> >This is a real "Duh!".  By the way, are you advocating that we attack
> >Pakistan first, and THEN Iraq?  I have a better idea.  First, we'll
> >Israel - that will completely fool the fake Islamists and we can sneak in
> >sucker punch at both Pakistan and Iraq when they are still in shock.
> >can come next.
> >
> >Jon
> >
> >John W. Redelfs wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,2763,834287,00.html
> > >
> > > It looks like Marc may be vindicated in his predictions that the
> > > will come to power in Pakistan.  Why we are planning a war against
> > > when the Taliban is coming to power in a nation that already has
> > > weapons is a complete mystery to me.

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///

This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to