Re: I must admit. . .

[Reeza! <howree@cable.navy.mil>]

At 12:41 PM 12/21/98 -0600, Missouri FreeNet Administration wrote:
>
>
>*WHY* is it any of our business whether he owns weapons of *any* kind?  WE
>own them, and we USE them: Does this give other nations the right to
>embargo us, and to bomb us into oblivion if we refuse to allow THEM to
>tell US what to do?
>
>Our concern for his weaponry should only be an issue *IF* he uses them, as
>with *OUR* weaponry.  Yours is the classical anti-gun argument, and it's
>no more effective at the international level than at the state level.

This would be a valid argument, if he had not already sanctioned Kuwait.
OOPS. Did you forget that?

Your arguments would be better applied to Somalia and Bosnia than they are
to Iraq. Our presence in those countries was of a slightly different
character than it is in Iraq now isn't it???

Hmmm???

>:Reeza!
>:DH Key available on request
>Note that your DH Key is a "munition"...  Shouldn't you be "qualified" to
>have it by the USG - strictly for the safety of the world, of course...
>
>Yours, 
>J.A. Terranson
>sysadmin@mfn.org

well J.A., my DH Key is just as much a "munition" as my house key, legal
definitions not-withstanding.
============================================================================
DH Key available upon request.


The affairs of Men rarely rely on the dictates of logic, or even common sense.


	"Yeah, they mostly rely on something below the belt."

				-- my older sister