Yeah Jeff. That would be the logical conclusion.

Do you get it, or should I explain again?

mike regish

"Jeffrey Voight" wrote in message
...
Ah, I get it. Your sarcasm was lost on me since it tasted so much like
your prior posts.

So, now you're agreeing that .mil action was the appropriate response?

Jeff...

mike regish wrote:
You obviously don't recognize sarcasm when you read it.

I'll explain for you and I'll try to use small words.

Bob's statement was a desperate, yet feeble attempt to take a simple
statement about a specific set of circumstances and turn it into a
generalization. (That means he thinks I feel that way about all
situations
in all circumstances-ok?) Since it made no logical sense at all, and I
realized that said statement was not worth rebutting, I wrote the
response
you see. It's the same thing you are trying to do
with your response.

So if I write "Yeah Jeff. That's what I think," will you now understand
that
I really don't think that at all, or should I explain it some more for
you?

Do you get it now?

Jeez...

mike regish

"Jeffrey Voight" wrote in message
...

So, the U.N. was totally wrong in threatening .mil action? I suppose
that parents shouldn't discipline children and criminals are simply
misunderstood.

Jeff...

mike regish wrote:

Yeah, Bob. That would be the logical conclusion from that statement.

mike regish

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...


In article IZlAb.316634$ao4.1071509@attbi_s51, "mike regish"
wrote:



Certainly more than the time Bush allowed. Frankly, I would have
preferred
to have a permanent team of inspectors stationed there than rushing
to
war.

So, in your mind, war can never be justified.

--
Bob Noel