Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 25, 2003, 10:38 am

If I remember, FA, the question was, "is terrorism justified in retaliating against a nuclear attack by the US?," NOT "are nuclear attacks against the US justified?"

Now sit in the corner until you can come back and explain why those two questions are not the same.

Fallen Angel · Oct 25, 2003, 09:58 pm

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,)
If I remember, FA, the question was, "is terrorism justified in retaliating against a nuclear attack by the US?," NOT "are nuclear attacks against the US justified?"

Now sit in the corner until you can come back and explain why those two questions are not the same.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Rebel

For the hundredth time I dont care what the difference is,
now please do everyone a favour who has to endure your odius company and drop dead.

G. Adams · Oct 26, 2003, 01:24 pm

Well the reason I had to, and even Rebel and Sec8 had to ask the same question again and again, is because you don't care about that difference. Which would lead me to the same conclusion as earlier.

**Sean** · Oct 28, 2003, 11:18 am

I deleted fallen angels tangents, so let's get back on topic.

Oct 25, 2003, 10:38 am	#61 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	If I remember, FA, the question was, "is terrorism justified in retaliating against a nuclear attack by the US?," NOT "are nuclear attacks against the US justified?" Now sit in the corner until you can come back and explain why those two questions are not the same. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 26, 2003, 01:24 pm	#63 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	Well the reason I had to, and even Rebel and Sec8 had to ask the same question again and again, is because you don't care about that difference. Which would lead me to the same conclusion as earlier. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 28, 2003, 11:18 am	#64 (permalink) (top)
Sean former overlord Location: New York Posts: 2,383	I deleted fallen angels tangents, so let's get back on topic. So it goes

Oct 25, 2003, 09:58 pm	#62 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,) If I remember, FA, the question was, "is terrorism justified in retaliating against a nuclear attack by the US?," NOT "are nuclear attacks against the US justified?" Now sit in the corner until you can come back and explain why those two questions are not the same.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Rebel For the hundredth time I dont care what the difference is, now please do everyone a favour who has to endure your odius company and drop dead.