![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
nobody wrote in message ...
[snip] Both Bliar and Bush deserve to be tried for war crimes. Their invasion of Iraq was just as legal as Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, or Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. [snip] Nope. I'm no Bush apologist, but this little bit isn't correct. Iraq was in violation of several agreements, most importantly the one they signed immediately after the first war, which they started. 'Round here we joking refer to this as Gulf War 1A (or Ver 1.1). It was the conclusion of the previous based upon his failure to live up to the "cease fire" agreements. Yes, there was alot of whoo ha spread around about what he was doing, but they were in violation and as such subject to the terms of the surrender they signed. This makes it "different" than the two invasions of which you refer. It still leaves alot of discussion room about the advisability or usefulness of having done it. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. As the shrub is fond of pointing out, removing a brutal dictator from power is hard to argue against. None the less, despite the short term relief given to the people of Iraq, it isn't clear that in the long run, they will necessarily be much better off. The US, Britian, France, Italy, and other countries have all mucked around in other parts of the world with the so called interest in "improving" conditions for the inhabitants. The results are neither universal nor generally admirable. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "me" wrote in message om... nobody wrote in message ... [snip] Both Bliar and Bush deserve to be tried for war crimes. Their invasion of Iraq was just as legal as Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, or Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. [snip] Nope. I'm no Bush apologist, but this little bit isn't correct. Iraq was in violation of several agreements, most importantly the one they signed immediately after the first war, which they started. I think that the gist of the argument is that Bush and the US had no business enforcing agreements made in behalf of the UN (resulting from action taken under the auspices of a UN resolution) when the UN itself wasn't ready to either take or sanction that kind of action in its behalf. That means that we can't hide behind the UN's skirts and claim that the devil made us do it. George Z. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "me" wrote in message om... nobody wrote in message ... [snip] Both Bliar and Bush deserve to be tried for war crimes. Their invasion of Iraq was just as legal as Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, or Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. [snip] Nope. I'm no Bush apologist, but this little bit isn't correct. Iraq was in violation of several agreements, most importantly the one they signed immediately after the first war, which they started. I think that the gist of the argument is that Bush and the US had no business enforcing agreements made in behalf of the UN (resulting from action taken under the auspices of a UN resolution) when the UN itself wasn't ready to either take or sanction that kind of action in its behalf. That means that we can't hide behind the UN's skirts and claim that the devil made us do it. We can't hide behind the UN's skirts at all, now, remember? We told her to go **** herself when we invaded whether she liked it or not... mellstrr--and how come nobody wants to talk about a certain OTHER country who has violated many "agreements" over the years? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"mellstrr" wrote in message
... We can't hide behind the UN's skirts at all, now, remember? We told her to go **** herself when we invaded whether she liked it or not... More likely we said "we'll go **** ourselves" because that's what we've done. And let's face it, "Old Europe" was right: There are no WMDs and Saddam was no clear threat, which were the points we pushed to justify the war that they voted against. Our leaders have been shown to be either incompetents or liars, and are now trying to get anyone they can deflect blame onto to fall on their swords in order to protect their own self-serving careers. Si |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SHOCKING: Britain's Defence Minister under fire for lying (BBC Radio) | [email protected] | Military Aviation | 30 | February 11th 04 04:34 AM |
New Ministers of National Defence in Canada | Andrew Chaplin | Military Aviation | 47 | December 15th 03 09:36 PM |
Australia to participate in US missile defence program | David Bromage | Military Aviation | 40 | December 13th 03 01:52 PM |
[AU] Defence support for Bush visit | David Bromage | Military Aviation | 7 | October 23rd 03 05:04 AM |
USA Defence Budget Realities | Stop SPAM! | Military Aviation | 17 | July 9th 03 02:11 AM |