| Another One Bites the Dust [message #172929] |
Mon, 26 September 2005 15:59  |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
One step closer to Zarqawi.
Eat lead, fucker.
Who says we're still losing?
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
[Updated on: Mon, 26 September 2005 16:00] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173297 is a reply to message #172929] |
Fri, 30 September 2005 04:43  |
 |
Dreadlord
Messages: 55
Registered: September 2005
Location: Russia, Voskresensk
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
damn, when your government will understand that Iraq War is endless?
only their wish to obtain Iraqi oil is the reason of that war, nothing of that so-called "democracy"...
Control the media, control the mind.(c)CABAL
Peace through power.
........_____
___ / **** \=======# --------> FOR THE BROTHERHOOD!!!
;|HH*T-95*HH:\
(@=@=@=@=@)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173310 is a reply to message #172929] |
Fri, 30 September 2005 09:08 |
 |
glyde51
Messages: 1827
Registered: August 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
It wasn't just oil.
1) Allies for military uses
2) Oil
3) Shooting at WMD-less people
4) Ignoring intelligence officers
5) Oil
No. Seriously. No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173319 is a reply to message #173310] |
Fri, 30 September 2005 09:53 |
 |
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| glyde51 wrote on Fri, 30 September 2005 12:08 |
It wasn't just oil.
1) Allies for military uses
2) Oil
3) Shooting at WMD-less people
4) Ignoring intelligence officers
5) Oil
|
When are you going to fucking realize that you have absolutely NO clue as to what you're talking about concerning the Iraq War... or most things for that matter. The Iraq War has NOTHING to do with oil. The CIA had information suggesting that Iraq was producing the chemical weapon VX. VX is extremely dangerous and powerful. I'm pretty damn sure that even YOU wouldn't want that weapon in the hands of terrorists. Obviously, we didn't find any VX, but that's not the only reason why we went to war. Saddam was known to associate with Osama and funded many terrorist groups. Saddam ruthlessly killed Kurds because he didn't like them. Let's not forget how ruthless Saddam was towards his own people, even loyalists. Granted, the war isn't exactly a "legal" war, but personally, I feel that morals are more important to uphold rather than laws if the two contradict (which, for the most part, they don't). This war is more of a moral war than anything, and I completely agree with it on the basis that we cannot let this extremely evil man hold any power and especially fund terrorist groups who more actively seek the free world's destruction. This not only puts America in danger, but Canada, England, etc... This affects you as well, so stop making it out to be that we're just doing it for America's gain and for all the wrong reasons. I, personally, don't want evil people to hold power, which is why I won't vote for Hitlery if she runs for President.
whoa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173598 is a reply to message #173561] |
Mon, 03 October 2005 17:22 |
|
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SuperMidget wrote on Mon, 03 October 2005 11:38 |
Also what happened with the trial of Saddam? Everyone's forgotten about it already...
|
I can't wait until his trial takes place, because when he's convicted on all charges, the war will finally be validated, once and for all, and it will be known to the entire world, and all this debating about it can cease.
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
(<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
(<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173647 is a reply to message #172929] |
Tue, 04 October 2005 19:46 |
 |
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I could have sworn on many, MANY occasions it has been affirmed that the reasons to going to war (the ones in question; circa 2003) was all but exclusively the supposition that Saddam had WMD and that he posed a "real threat" to the United States.
The problem you seem to have is (and while I do single you out here, this wholeheartedly applies to your ilk) that you see peripherals as themselves that which they are not. Your Congress is (thankfully) smart enough to know what is fully legal and what is fully illegal. Your "supplimentary" reasons for going to war are very much illegal in every single intelligable nation on the face of this planet. That's why the bill passed ALLOWING the war didn't mention anything save the alledged "threat" Iraq posed to the United States.
Since you, curiously enough, try and negate the other side of your argument by... deviating from the topic, I feel I ought to point out that the validation of the war matters insomuch that Hydra stated that it would be vindicated. I say otherwise. I am also fully capable to not only prove it, but squelch your redundant, self-validating, and at this point over 2 years later, seemingly random attempts at a rebuttal. Call it arrogance if you want to (as you undoubtably will continue you do), but I still invite you to prove me wrong. Something, by the way, you have yet to do.
Sniper Extraordinaire
Read the FUD Rules before you come in and make an ass of yourself.
All your base are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
[Updated on: Tue, 04 October 2005 19:47] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173648 is a reply to message #172929] |
Tue, 04 October 2005 20:01 |
 |
Aircraftkiller
Messages: 8213
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
I could care less if we had no reason for attacking and occupying Iraq. I always supported it because we've had every right to do so since 1991.
There is no "international law" that means anything to anyone. Should we decide to ignore or obey, it poses no consequence to us. Thus "international law" and "illegal", linked together, are just your ways of complaining about a war in an attempt to make yourself look more knowledgable than you really are about the subject.
It's not easy to prove someone wrong when they will not change their opinion. You still believe "international law" applies even if it cannot be enforced. It's as if you would voluntarily restrain yourself from throwing trash on your lawn if your local home owner's association told you that you couldn't anymore, even though they hold no power whatsoever.
Even if the law exists, it has no power, thus it holds no credence for anyone and any nation that has any self-respect. I would not adhere to laws that couldn't be enforced, and I seriously doubt you would either.
Of course, there's nothing I really can do to convince you that "international law" is null and that using it in an argument is pointless; short of being the members of the committee that make said "law" into inaction. More to the point, though, why would you expect the United States to follow "international law" when it isn't enforced for the nation we invaded because of the lack of enforcement?
I know you've said it was vigilante justice before, and that we shouldn't have done it. That's a great reason if the United Nations were doing their part in enforcing their own resolutions and laws. The Minutement in the Southwest aren't supposed to be patrolling the border to spot out terrorist suspects and illegal aliens, but they still do it while even cooperating with the Border Patrol.
Then again, the UN didn't want to cooperate with the United States for being their Minutemen in this situation, and you know this. So my only conclusion is that you either support Iraq's pre-war dictatorship and corrupt UN deals with said government, or you're doing this just to annoy people. I wouldn't venture to say you are without morality or intelligence, since I know you well enough to tell you're a decent guy who disagrees with me on points; so I'm led to believe you're using this subject as a way to entertain yourself ala-FUD style by posting the most far-fetched and irritating theories you can in order to support anti-war sentiment.
[Updated on: Tue, 04 October 2005 20:02] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Another One Bites the Dust [message #173649 is a reply to message #172929] |
Tue, 04 October 2005 20:07 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Ah, still on this "It's ok as long as it doesn't conflict with want we want" idea, huh?
| Quote: |
I always supported it because we've had every right to do so since 1991.
|
Interesting, considering this would only have a hope of holding true if it was international law tha twas violated. Yet...
| Quote: |
Even if the law exists, it has no power, thus it holds no credence for anyone and any nation that has any self-respect. I would not adhere to laws that couldn't be enforced, and I seriously doubt you would either.
|
So, make up your mind. Either it DOES exists, in which perhaps your arguement could hold some sort of water. Or, it doesn't exist, in which the whoile idea of "we had every right" means absolutely nothing.
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
