Re: Bank failures
- From: Alan Baker <alangbaker@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 01:44:38 -0700
In article <vr1td4lk3uhjbpt5ovvsmo0qecn2gm442j@xxxxxxx>,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:20:19 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
The goal of regime change was explicitly stated by the Clinton
Administration and codified into law. So you shouldn't be that
surprised.
That wasn't what Bush said they were invading Iraq to do; at least, it
was nowhere *near* upper most.
What do you think they were going to do when they invaded, leave him
in power.?
No. But if removing a despot was the only goal, aren't there a whole lot
of regimes the U.S. should be attacking?
And invasion isn't the only way to promote regime change.
True, but it's a sure thing.
It's also a violation of international law.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- References:
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Carbon
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Howard Brazee
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Howard Brazee
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Alan Baker
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Alan Baker
- Re: Bank failures
- From: Jack Hollis
- Re: Bank failures
- Prev by Date: Re: Bank failures
- Next by Date: Re: Bank failures
- Previous by thread: Re: Bank failures
- Next by thread: Re: Bank failures
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|