Difference between revisions of "Talk:Republican/Aug,08/World News"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
There isn't any real proof we weren't leaning toward peace either, so your stuck in between a rock and a hard place. Reasonable doubt we werent for peace and reasonable doubt we were. Exactly why no fingers can be pointed either way, and thus it is ''inconclusive'' as noted in the article. | There isn't any real proof we weren't leaning toward peace either, so your stuck in between a rock and a hard place. Reasonable doubt we werent for peace and reasonable doubt we were. Exactly why no fingers can be pointed either way, and thus it is ''inconclusive'' as noted in the article. | ||
[[User:Peleus|Peleus]] 03:07, 13 August 2008 (CEST) | [[User:Peleus|Peleus]] 03:07, 13 August 2008 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :You "justice will always prevails" rings good to the sounds of Enweil's marching armies. ;) -[[User:Chénier|Chénier]] 05:03, 13 August 2008 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 05:03, 13 August 2008
Theory A full of holes...?
What evidence can you provide to show that you were opting for peace? Or, that your peace offerings were more than just camouflage for your other activities?
This is a particularly weak counter argument - simply, "Believe us, because we said so." --Jmadsen 00:07, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
There isn't any real proof we weren't leaning toward peace either, so your stuck in between a rock and a hard place. Reasonable doubt we werent for peace and reasonable doubt we were. Exactly why no fingers can be pointed either way, and thus it is inconclusive as noted in the article. Peleus 03:07, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
- You "justice will always prevails" rings good to the sounds of Enweil's marching armies. ;) -Chénier 05:03, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
