[lit-ideas] Re: Iran is angry at itself
- From: "Simon Ward" <sedward@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:21:12 -0000
Come on Eric, you're quibbling.
According to the 'news' article, the US administration is positing two
reasons for an attack on Iran.
And in that respect, it's interesting that the first - evidence that Iran is
developing nuclear weapons - hasn't been converted into an attack
considering how sure evrybody is that Iran is on such a course. Very
reminiscent of the Iraq build up. Everybody was convinced that Saddam had
WMD stocks. Only he didn't.
Now we know that you're not in favour of a strike on Iran, so are you
defending Bush or attacking the BBC?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric" <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:59 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Iran is angry at itself
>>rather that the triggers for such an attack are two-fold
And what do you think a "trigger" is? Some cybernetic algorithm from deep
inside Thunder Mountain? Granted, Bush's decisions may be questionable,
but they haven't automated him yet.
To say it's a trigger is to say it may be considered. And that's not news.
There are countless triggers for countless situations.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
