The Logic Off Topic list

Because there's a difference between 'I heard from some unknown source
that's what their strategy was' and 'this is what they directly stated'.

> From: "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...>
> Reply-To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 02:41:15 -0700
> To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [L-OT] OT Goodbye / Hussein
> 
> Not getting how this is exclusive from the message being replied to?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <GAmoore@...>
> To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 9:05 PM
> Subject: [L-OT] OT Goodbye / Hussein
> 
> 
>> Thats not what I heard. The Arab coalition wouldn't agree to invading
>> Bagdad - although no army stood in the way of the American and British
>> armies. They expected and believed that the Iraqi people would rise up
>> and revolt. There were isolated rebels in the south and the Kurds in the
>> north. Unfortunately, the US and England didn't defend them sufficiently
>> and it died out. It takes a real army to defeat that bastard, not a bunch
>> of ragtag desserters and shop keepers.
>> 
>>>> Because dropping Saddam would have meant the fundamentalists would
>>>> have come to power.  Choosing between two evils...  And so after our
>>>> oil-supply has been secured (Gulf-war), Saddam is now allowed to
>>>> terrorize his own people, while the western world sits back and does
>>>> nothing...
>>> 
>>> The reason Colin Powell gave was that they didn't want to occupy the
> country
>>> long term, and that they felt they would have to do that to stabilize it
> if
>>> they took out Saddam.  Makes sense, if only from a purely operational
>>> view....
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>