again, how much oil have we stolen. i think we have
already saw that this "war for oil" bit just does not
stand up to the test of logic. 
  please don't disparage our troops by saying they
could not do anything else, they did not know what
they were doing. i know too many brave young people
who knew exactly what they were doing. don't put down
their courage with this bs. my brother is a chaplain.
i meet some of the young men and women. don't belittle
their patritism and courage like this.  

--- Anthony Arnold <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Just food for thought, we have already spent
> hundreds of billions just on
> our mission of steeling oil, and are sending troops
> who are serving to pay
> for college, how about using the money to fund their
> college instead of
> having them help in the steeling process, in hopes
> they'll use their
> education to develop better energy sources.  I would
> honestly think this
> would be a win-win situation for everybody.  Of
> course, Iraq needs new
> schools and hospitals, I could name several cities
> in the states with the
> similar need, and they're overlooked.  
> 
> Thanks, 
> Anthony 
> Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cerebral Palsy List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Linda Walker
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 12:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: FW: was dental question now iraq war.
> 
> Sending thousands to die in order to steal the
> worlds oil supply or 
> diddling a young woman who is not your wife are
> equivalent crimes......no
> way
> We are going to run out of oil and we'd better start
> planning for 
> that. Every one of these returning soldiers buys the
> biggest gas hog 
> they can find. It disgusts me.
> 
> At 08:23 AM 3/25/2006, you wrote:
> >I think that none of us are saying that war is
> wrong, but we would love
> >actual facts before going in, and I think the UN
> was trying to get those
> >facts but Bush was too antsy to call war.  He might
> say it was a difficult
> >decision to reach, bull sh-t.
> >
> >And about Clinton lying, let's say if a friend was
> playing around on his
> >wife, I wouldn't broadcast it every night on the
> news.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Anthony
> >Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Cerebral Palsy List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> >ken barber
> >Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 9:50 AM
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: FW: was dental question now iraq war.
> >
> >now mag, the definition of a lie is to tell
> something
> >that you know is not true at the time you tell it.
> >look it up.
> >   you guys who can't come up with anything but
> "bush
> >lied" just do not know how foolish you sound. i
> love
> >you, but, please, get past that tripe. bush as well
> as
> >all your derm senators and intelligence around the
> >world all said saddam had wmd. you do not say every
> >body lied, only "bush lied."
> >   the truth is that nobody lied about wmd, becouse
> not
> >a one of them knew that he did not have them and
> went
> >ahead and said he did.
> >    get past the foolishness and get something
> >substantial to say.
> >
> >--- Magenta Raine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > Saddam is being tried for the atrocities he
> > > perpetrated against the Kurds,
> > > and Iranians, as well as murdering some of his
> own
> > > people.
> > >
> > > Bush lying about weapons of mass destruction or
> > > Clinton lying about his
> > > affair; which  is worse?  I say bush's lies
> about
> > > wmd is worse because
> > > after they found no wmd, he made up several
> other
> > > stories about why we are
> > > there.
> > >
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > Come visit my new store!
> > > http://www.cafepress.com/TamarMag
> > > visit my Blog at;
> > > http://tamarmag-newsletters.blogspot.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > > [Original Message]
> > > > From: Anthony Arnold
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Date: 3/24/2006 5:19:03 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: FW: was dental question   now
> iraq
> > > war.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know what we're currently trying
> Hussein
> > > and his brother for, but
> > > > they had no involvement in September 11th, so
> why
> > > are we over there
> > > besides
> > > > to take our frustration out on somebody.  But
> on
> > > the other hand, if I
> > > would
> > > > become the president tomorrow, I wouldn't pull
> out
> > > immediately as some
> > > would
> > > > like to see, I would personally like to fix
> what
> > > my country has done.
> > > It's
> > > > like if I accidentally dropped a cigarette on
> > > somebody's carpet and it
> > > burns
> > > > a hole, I would feel oppogated to replace
> their
> > > carpet, no matter what.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Anthony
> > > > Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Cerebral Palsy List
> > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> > > > Kendall David Corbett
> > > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:49 PM
> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > Subject: Re: FW: was dental question now iraq
> war.
> > > >
> > > > Ken,
> > > >
> > > > Whether the Iraqis are better off is a tough
> call;
> > > they may (or may not,
> > > > some would argue) have greater civil
> liberties,
> > > but their lives may be
> > > > in greater immediate danger than they were
> under
> > > Hussein. =20
> > > >
> > > > On the opposite side of that coin, many would
> > > argue that we in the US
> > > > are safer, but have had our civil liberties
> > > eroded.  It was said in the
> > > > immediate post 9/11 period that the terrorists
> > > wanted to destroy the
> > > > American (read US) way of life, and they have
> made
> > > a start toward that,
> > > > IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > As I read UN Resolution 1441, it doesn't
> > > explicitly give member states
> > > > of the UN permission to undertake unilateral
> > > military action against
> > > > Iraq.  That does seem to be permissible under
> UN
> > > resolutions 678 and
> > > > 687, which were signed in 1990 and 1991,
> > > respectively. =20
> > > >
> > > > My point is that the armed forces presently
> > > engaged as coalition
> > > > partners do not wear UN uniforms, and as such
> are
> > > not formally
> > > > recognized as UN forces.
> > > >
> > > > Kendall=20
> > > >
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com