On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 5:51 PM, Pete Theisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2008 16:35, Stephen Russell wrote: > > > > > > > On the other hand, once the WMD made it to Syria the intelligence > > > strategy would quite naturally change, would it not? > > > What would change? Invade them? Why not Iran? > > > > This was a show of the lean and mean of business that when applied to > the > > military was a total failure. Just ask Bumsfeld when you see him at the > > unemployment office. > > Hi Stephen! > > I think they only want two wars at a time. Invading Syria would be a third > front and that would mean we would be in a, uh, World War? > ---------------------- > That would just extend the border of Iraq, or remove it. Sorry but that isn't a world war. Or a war to end all wars. It may be a war to start a lot of little ones. But then we can give that title to Mr. Bush. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
