From: "Robert Comer" 

> That's more pure conjecture, and you know it.

To you maybe.

> Can't argue with that, I could be lying, but I think I mostly enter these
> threads after a new post is entered falsely claiming (yet again, with the
> same lack of evidence) that Bush is lying -- when those false claims stop
> coming, my refutation won't be necessary.

Same here, I'll never initiate a thread like this, and haven't for a LONG
time.  I only respond when someone says something like you just did.

>(yet again, with the same lack of evidence)

There's plenty of evidence for me.

> Trusting in his doctrine and his implementation of same is one thing,
> certainly I can understand a pacifist not wanting to go along with that --

I'm not pacifist and I don't think many around here are.  I *am* very much
against invading countries and killing their citizens for no logical reason
though.

> but to then take it out to the illogical conclusion along the lines of:
> "well, he's a war mongering chimp and he lies besides" in
effort to refute
> that doctrine is, quite simply nonsensical.

Have you *ever* heard me say something like that here?  How about anyone
else here?  The only one I've heard call Bush a chimp is you, and the war
mongering and yes, even the lies, are fair game.

> If you think the world would be better off with Saddam in power, that we
> should just roll over and not "stir things up" in the world,
just say so,

I believe I already had.  Sadam was an evil tyrant, of that I agree with no
doubt, *but*, what we did caused a whole bunch of little, even more evil,
tyrants to be spawned and the world is going to pay for that eventually.
(and we have already started paying for it ourselves.)  It would have been
nice for the Iraqi's themselves to take care of their own problem, but now
they don't have that option.

Sadam was a threat to his own country, but not much outside that, the
terrorists we created are a threat to everyone.

> don't try to undermine our foreign policy by interjecting the
"Bush lied"
> pomposity at every turn (and yes, Bob, I know you're not a primary
> offender in that regard)

We have to talk if we believe something is going wrong in our country --
it's our duty as American citizens.

--
Bob Comer


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:43599f1f{at}w3.nls.net...
>
> "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
> news:435995bc{at}w3.nls.net...
>> Bush knew a lot of this to begin with, hence the lying part...  I know
>> you don't agree, but you know I don't agree with you about it either.
>
> That's more pure conjecture, and you know it.
>
>> We really ought to just can discussions like this as none of us are going
>> to change anyone else's mind.
>
> Can't argue with that, I could be lying, but I think I mostly enter these
> threads after a new post is entered falsely claiming (yet again, with the
> same lack of evidence) that Bush is lying -- when those false claims stop
> coming, my refutation won't be necessary.
>
>>You choose to trust Bush, fine, that's okay, but at least understand why
>>we might not.
>
> Trusting in his doctrine and his implementation of same is one thing,
> certainly I can understand a pacifist not wanting to go along with that --
> but to then take it out to the illogical conclusion along the lines of:
> "well, he's a war mongering chimp and he lies besides" in
effort to refute
> that doctrine is, quite simply nonsensical.
>
> If you think the world would be better off with Saddam in power, that we
> should just roll over and not "stir things up" in the world,
just say so,
> don't try to undermine our foreign policy by interjecting the
"Bush lied"
> pomposity at every turn (and yes, Bob, I know you're not a primary
> offender in that regard)
>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5