| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"dapra" |
| Date: |
04 Jun 2007 11:02:23 PM |
| Object: |
Is the war lost? |
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
05 Jun 2007 08:08:03 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "cri de coeur" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
05 Jun 2007 08:54:42 AM |
|
|
In article <6una63hqot22ihuf6sheo2mno7sle74jat@4ax.com>, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
You STILL don't GET IT. You have been watching Bush's face when you
should have been watching his hands.
The object of the war is NOT what Bush SAYS because the object of
the war was,
has been, and IS -- to transfer the contents of the U.S. Treasury to
his supporters, the war profiteers; to enhance his "Unitary" powers,
and to dominate the oil resources of the middle east.
Continuation of the war
continues the looting of the treasury and confirms his "war
presidency".
ALL THE REST IS MISDIRECTION -- SMOKE AND MIRRORS.
THE PEA WAS NEVER UNDER THE SHELL.. GET IT?
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "hopeful" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
05 Jun 2007 09:20:06 AM |
|
|
"cri de coeur" <netpost@pochta.ru> wrote in message
news:050620070654422635%netpost@pochta.ru...
In article <6una63hqot22ihuf6sheo2mno7sle74jat@4ax.com>, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
You got your groups mixed up, the "neocons" are the zionists that have
infiltrated our government and the Jewish handlers of the "owned"
Republicans. Originally, in the context of
the United States, it referred to a
right-wing movement of former political leftists. As Michael Lind has
observed, "Most neoconservative defense intellectuals have their roots on
the left, not the right. They are products of the influential
Jewish-American sector of the Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s,
which morphed into anti-communist liberalism between the 1950s and 1970s and
finally into a kind of militaristic and imperial right with no precedents in
American culture or political history." from
disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Neoconservative
Then search "global stragety councils".
Look up informationclearinghouse.info - article5010.htm
Look up rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1390
" ...Buying Influence
Saban was one of the major contributors to the former California governor
Gray Davis, and in return Davis appointed him to the board of regents of the
University of California. However, more recently, Saban, along with Steven
Spielberg, have shifted their loyalties to Arnold Schwarzenegger after the
new California governor's unequivocal support for Israel's latest invasion
of Lebanon ... " Haim Saban, sourcewatch.org. Another rabid zionist that
owns politicians.
Search wolfowitz, libby, feith, and perle to learn about the grand plan for
the Middle East. Look further into the groups they have created or served.
These four horsemen of the neocon apocalypse and their army of pork-eating
Zionists have taken over the government of the United States for the sake of
expanding Israel's dirty little war for land, nothing more nothing less.
President Bush invaded Iraq to remove a threat against Israel, nothing more
nothing less. Now the Jews are instigating for the invasion of Iran. All
the while the Jews are actively pursuing their eradication of the
Palestinians, just look at 1 Samuel 15:2-3 for the Jews' justification. A
fine example of the Jews' concept of social justice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Higgins" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
05 Jun 2007 08:13:16 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
05 Jun 2007 08:00:56 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins
<gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <136aobbp13e1237@corp.supernews.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
I have one, thankyou.
Which is more than over a half million Iraqi's can say.
--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
15 Jun 2007 11:22:36 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
--
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is
unable to believe things for which there is
no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
—Chaz Bufe, The American Heretic’s Dictionary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
15 Jun 2007 09:15:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
24 Jun 2007 05:18:25 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:45:19 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
I'm not so sure about that. Shrub used to routinely surrender to bar
stools.
--
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is
unable to believe things for which there is
no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
—Chaz Bufe, The American Heretic’s Dictionary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
24 Jun 2007 07:34:56 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:18:25 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <cbrt735hnpjna40np7vambia84ael0upqp@4ax.com>
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:45:19 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
I'm not so sure about that. Shrub used to routinely surrender to bar
stools.
"Bar stools"?
That was on a protest sign during a proctologists' strike!
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
29 Jun 2007 11:22:37 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:04:56 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:18:25 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <cbrt735hnpjna40np7vambia84ael0upqp@4ax.com>
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:45:19 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
I'm not so sure about that. Shrub used to routinely surrender to bar
stools.
"Bar stools"?
That was on a protest sign during a proctologists' strike!
Right. They were protesting against a move from digital to analog.
--
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is
unable to believe things for which there is
no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
—Chaz Bufe, The American Heretic’s Dictionary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
29 Jun 2007 07:30:31 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:22:37 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <vcca835jcd0ap120495am8b5had1t7qm4t@4ax.com>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:04:56 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:18:25 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <cbrt735hnpjna40np7vambia84ael0upqp@4ax.com>
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:45:19 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
I'm not so sure about that. Shrub used to routinely surrender to bar
stools.
"Bar stools"?
That was on a protest sign during a proctologists' strike!
Right. They were protesting against a move from digital to analog.
You know where you can stick that!
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
11 Jul 2007 03:19:05 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:00:31 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:22:37 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <vcca835jcd0ap120495am8b5had1t7qm4t@4ax.com>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:04:56 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:18:25 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <cbrt735hnpjna40np7vambia84ael0upqp@4ax.com>
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:45:19 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:22:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u5f573tnsujubv0u8otq9t5bjkoitj2ake@4ax.com>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:02:23 -0400, dapra <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
- Refer: <2YSdnXnkndyjffnbnZ2dnUVZ_rqhnZ2d@comcast.com>
Of course the war was not lost. The illegal invasion was successful in
less then a month. It's hard to call it a war, since there were hardly
any resistance from the Iraqi military.
They buckled just as fast as the Democrats, except the Iraqis had a
plan, while the Democrats had none.
In spite of the charges that the Republicans (the neocons) had no plans,
they did. They planned to rule the oil fields of Iraq and Iran, and keep
the worlds economy by the balls. The execution of the plan did have a
lots of problems.
But back to the main theme. Is the war lost? The corporate media is
unable to phrase the question correctly.
The question is; Did the 'colonization' of Iraq, controlling their oil
and their economy is lost? Probably it is.
But! The lack of success of the imperialist aggressions is not a loss
but a gain for humanity, including most of the people of the US.
Unless the White House Criminal Genocidal Lunatics "decide" to use
their proven weapons of mass destruction.
--
Get a life.
Translation: I surrender.
The quickest cave-in by a genocidal Republican ever!
I'm not so sure about that. Shrub used to routinely surrender to bar
stools.
"Bar stools"?
That was on a protest sign during a proctologists' strike!
Right. They were protesting against a move from digital to analog.
You know where you can stick that!
/cue frank zappa's "Dynamo Hum"
--
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is
unable to believe things for which there is
no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
—Chaz Bufe, The American Heretic’s Dictionary
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
15 Jun 2007 12:20:03 PM |
|
|
The war in Iraq is the world's biggest oil guzzler.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174810
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is the war lost? |
24 Jun 2007 05:17:08 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:20:03 -0400, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote in alt.atheism
The war in Iraq is the world's biggest oil guzzler.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174810
I know. Irony abounds. Oil is in overall diminishing supply. So lets
use up the finite resource *faster!* The world would have been decades
ahead if Shrub's oil companies hadn't worked for this failed resource
grab. They get mega profits and the taxpayer, once again, the shaft.
--
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is
unable to believe things for which there is
no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
—Chaz Bufe, The American Heretic’s Dictionary
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
