Ride an SUB not an SUV

"Matthew T. Russotto" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clark F Morris wrote:

The US took on a responsibility to those who cooperated with it after
the invasion. How it treats those people may determine how US troops
are treated in the future. Many people are risking their lives daily
to make Iraq work. I for one don't want to see them left to the
tender mercies of the various groups directing the suicide bombers.

Iraq can't work. As soon as the US leaves, the civil war will heat up
full time and continue until some group hostile to the US comes out on
top. This is inevitable, unless the US maintains the occupation
indefinitely.

Then we become a fully-colonian power!!!

"Baxter" wrote in message
...
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

"Baxter" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
.. .

"Baxter" wrote in message
...

Do stay on track - the issue is whether we spend hundreds of
billions
of
dollars on Iraqi's or whether we spend a tenth of that on our own
people.

(and yes, there are reports that elections are not particularly fair
in
LA.)

Then why did you bring up your feeling that the people of Louisiana
are
somehow downtrodden in a way that Mississippians aren't?

Your question is nonsensical.

Obviously you don't have an answer then.

No, your question is nonsensical in this context. Your question might be
more appropriate in context with the US Attorneys firings that are in the
news.

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

It is like talking to religious fanatics. No amount of good research ever
can change beliefs, espeically when no one even bother to look at
probability and risk. If you post a refereed article, they just say, "You
already posted that." After that, they back to whatever horse they were
riding.

"george conklin" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

It is like talking to religious fanatics. No amount of good research ever
can change beliefs, espeically when no one even bother to look at
probability and risk. If you post a refereed article, they just say, "You
already posted that." After that, they back to whatever horse they were
riding.

Yes, that's exactly how it feels to try to debate with you.

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

"george conklin" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

It is like talking to religious fanatics. No amount of good research
ever can change beliefs, espeically when no one even bother to look at
probability and risk. If you post a refereed article, they just say,
"You already posted that." After that, they back to whatever horse they
were riding.

Yes, that's exactly how it feels to try to debate with you.


You just can't stand refereed sources over your own sad emotions.

"george conklin" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

"george conklin" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

It is like talking to religious fanatics. No amount of good research
ever can change beliefs, espeically when no one even bother to look at
probability and risk. If you post a refereed article, they just say,
"You already posted that." After that, they back to whatever horse they
were riding.

Yes, that's exactly how it feels to try to debate with you.


You just can't stand refereed sources over your own sad emotions.

You as well...

"george conklin" wrote:

"Amy Blankenship" wrote
"george conklin" wrote
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote
"Amy Blankenship" wrote:

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Because George is tired of seeing the same refuted arguments
posted over and over again. After a certain point there is
no need to be polite.

It is like talking to religious fanatics. No amount of good research
ever can change beliefs, espeically when no one even bother to look at
probability and risk. If you post a refereed article, they just say,
"You already posted that." After that, they back to whatever horse they
were riding.

Yes, that's exactly how it feels to try to debate with you.

You just can't stand refereed sources over your own sad emotions.

She just can't stand refereed sources over her own emotional outbursts.

-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Matthew T. Russotto" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clark F Morris wrote:

The US took on a responsibility to those who cooperated with it after
the invasion. How it treats those people may determine how US troops
are treated in the future. Many people are risking their lives daily
to make Iraq work. I for one don't want to see them left to the
tender mercies of the various groups directing the suicide bombers.

Iraq can't work. As soon as the US leaves, the civil war will heat up
full time and continue until some group hostile to the US comes out on
top. This is inevitable, unless the US maintains the occupation
indefinitely.

As soon as the US leaves, the various parties realize there's nobody to
"protect" them and sit down and negotiate. Al Qaeda gets thrown out of
Iraq - if not killed first.

Currently, nearly ALL groups in Iraq are hostile to the US.

-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

"Baxter" wrote in message
...

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

"Baxter" wrote in message
...
"Amy Blankenship" wrote in
message
.. .

"Baxter" wrote in message
...

Do stay on track - the issue is whether we spend hundreds of
billions
of
dollars on Iraqi's or whether we spend a tenth of that on our own
people.

(and yes, there are reports that elections are not particularly
fair
in
LA.)

Then why did you bring up your feeling that the people of Louisiana
are
somehow downtrodden in a way that Mississippians aren't?

Your question is nonsensical.

Obviously you don't have an answer then.

No, your question is nonsensical in this context. Your question might
be
more appropriate in context with the US Attorneys firings that are in
the
news.

I see you've learned one of George Conklin's less admirable
techniques...If
someone disagrees with you or questions you further, declare the
comment/question irrelevant, drivel, or nonsensical. Nice :-)

Then suppose you detail that relevance for us?