To: Timeout
"What's gotten into the Times?"They had to decide between rescuing an enemy of the US or rescuing the UN. They chose the UN. I'm sure it wasn't an easy choice for them.
5 posted on
02/15/2003 4:09:09 AM PST by
Bonaparte
To: Bonaparte
That is a tough choice...to rescue Saddam or the UN.
But, I think the UN is a bigger enemy. They are too dumb to figure out Saddam is hiding all his WMD.
Their Blue-Helmet Nazis confuse "peace-keeping mission" with "piece-getting mission" (those Blue Helmets seem to turn one into a rapist, sodomist, and pedophile)
The UN Sec-Gen calls Israel a "war-criminal" when it sends in its military to go after terrorists....but says nothing when the Islamics blow themselves up in Israel
The UN is a dinosaur and the only usefulness left for it is that it will become someones fossil fuel in a few years
7 posted on
02/15/2003 4:25:00 AM PST by
UCFRoadWarrior
(Its not about Iraqi oil...Its about Saddam's gas)
To: Bonaparte
"They had to decide between rescuing an enemy of the US or rescuing the UN."There is a difference here?
11 posted on
02/15/2003 4:38:42 AM PST by
Redleg Duke
(Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
To: Bonaparte
They had to decide between rescuing an enemy of the US or rescuing the UN. They chose the UN. I'm sure it wasn't an easy choice for them. I think you nailed it here.
37 posted on
02/15/2003 7:32:14 AM PST by
RJL
To: Bonaparte
Your 'chose the U.N.' post #5 is my nominee for post of the day.
Bravo! ;^)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson