XPost: alt.atheism
From: knicklas@plovdiv.bg
In article , hlwdjsd2
@NOSPAMgmail.com says...
>
> In article ,
> Free Lunch wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:01:14 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
> > alt.atheism:
> >
> > >In article <3be9s8hknlthq18do0k5qllhk2hlg1to4c@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:33:06 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
> > >> alt.atheism:
> > >>
> > >> >In article , Free Lunch
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> ...
> > >> >> You make guesses all the time. Too bad you never bother to learn
> > >> >> anything.
> > >> >
> > >> >I don't know your age. I am 62 years old. I remember how we got
involved
> > >> >in Vietnam. It happened very slowly. We first sent "advisors" which
were
> > >> >soldiers "advising" the troops in South Vietnam. It slowly evolved into
> > >> >sending to Vietnam thousands of members of the military.
> > >>
> > >> You forget the 'domino theory' and the overwrought fear of Communism.
> > >>
> > >> >The providing of arms could be the first step in regard to getting
members
> > >> >of the USA military involved in that war.
> > >>
> > >> Or it could be a way to keep Iran from gaining even more power in Syria.
> > >>
> > >> This is a complicated issue and you approach things in far too
> > >> simplistic a manner.
> > >
> > >Providing anti-tank weapons and anti-aircraft weapons to members of a
> > >radical muslim rebel group called Ahrar al-Sham is NOT the solution. They
> > >lied and claimed to be a moderate group of rebels in order to get those
> > >weapons.
> > >
> > When do you allege that we provided them?
>
> And what's the evidence that they lied?
Are they Islamists, Jeannie? Do you consider Islamists to be radical? If
not, what is your definition of radical?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
