This reply below is so sick that I cannot justify taking my time to argue with this monster of denial. Anyone else want to take a turn at whipping this creep? America put Saddam in office and now Richard is telling us that we're killing less children than Saddam so that makes our war's dead kids acceptable? Sick sick sick. Richard you truly are deviant - a broken personality.
Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Duveyoung wrote: > > Go take a flying fuck. > > > Get used to it, Ed, I've got over 8,000 more > messages to post. > > All the Gods fight and have wars, Ed, just like > people do. Haven't you heard of the Bharata war > in the Gita? You're supposed to stand up and > fight, not slink away from a debate like you do. > Even the Buddha was a warrior. Pacifism is suicide > - it's not for this age. You've got to fight for > what you believe in, otherwise you are doomed, > Sir. > > It is a terrible tragedy that any child should be > killed in a war, but you can't seem to rationally > debate this issue because you've got an obvious > ideological bias against the U.S. and the Bush > Administration. But you don't object at all to > the killing of unborn children. You just want to > ignore that issue and blame Bush for fighting the > War Against the Terrorists and trying to save the > children in Afghanistan and Iraq. > > In fact, child deaths in Iraq have dropped by two > thirds since the Iraq invasion. > > But, because of your bias, there's probably no > way that you would ever accept the idea that war > can save the lives of children. Why won't you fight > to save the children from the evil empires? > > "We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any > hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in > order to assure the survival and the success of > liberty." - John F. Kennedy > > In my opinion, Saddam alone is responsible for > Iraq's humanitarian crisis. >
