To: patriciaruth; Nogbad; Mitchell; Travis McGee; EternalHope; Plummz
getting more explicit now
To: okie01; freeperfromnj; dead; Sacajaweau; keri; aristeides; Fred Mertz; Miss Marple
btt
To: Shermy; Lion's Cub; piasa; Wallaby; John H K; Alamo-Girl; Howlin
ping
To: areafiftyone
"They would be nominating themselves as part of the regime that ought to get special attention," he told reporters Sept. 16.I love that turn of phrase... "special attention." Heh heh heh. Special attention from the United States is likely to be very unhealthy for the recipients...
To: areafiftyone; Travis McGee
They would be nominating themselves as part of the regime that ought to get special attentionTranslation: "Goombahs, y'all can kiss your Biblical Beasts of Burden g'bye if y'all try anything silly."
8 posted on
09/23/2002 1:17:02 PM PDT by
Poohbah
To: areafiftyone
Asked whether those who now profess complete loyalty to Saddam will stick with him and help launch an attack with a weapon of mass destruction, Rumsfeld replied: "One will not know until one gets to that moment." That is an unacceptable answer to an unacceptable possibility. Sending our troops into combat against someone who may use weapons of mass destruction on them. Not an option we should even consider. We have tatical nukes that can take Saddam out of power immediately with no risk to our people.
10 posted on
09/23/2002 1:20:18 PM PDT by
kjam22
To: areafiftyone
"The people (to whom) he says, `Go do it,' better think very carefully about whether that's how they want to handle their lives," Or deaths, as the case may be.
14 posted on
09/23/2002 1:39:31 PM PDT by
Mark17
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson