#151 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2005, 10:46 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 118
Rep Power: 222
muspell is on a distinguished road

Given that they no longer are mere individuals, that might be correct. But I think the problem in this case is that people doesn't want to know. Too many people don't care whether Congress mentioned conditions when they voted for the war, why they had conditions, or what they were, and noone cares if the white wash from the administration afterwards is as thin as paper. I mean, it's right there, available for all to see.

Really, the incredulous nuances of this particular issue is that yes, indeed, obviously, and so on, the president can legitimately say that no foreign power shall decide upon the policies of the US. The US can veto all decisions made in the UN, for instance. But it cannot overrule the judgement of the UNSC. That's how it was meant to work. So any country can deal with their own defense as they see fit perfectly legitimately, but cannot attack souvereign countries on a whim and claim legitimacy. Justified in terms of legitimacy would be if Iraq was an imminent threat, and if that was so, noone could argue. But as we know, the prerequisites were already disputed before the war and as I've said there were no new information of any substance available since about '98. That in itself shows what kind of impendence we're talking about. But no, "we're so scared we support our president's war for peace". And "if we think we're under attack, that's all that matters even in the face of all kinds of evidence that says otherwise". Fucking jerks. Beg pardon, I shouldn't write things like that of course. It is a perfectly legitimate point of view that the UN should not matter. But that point of view shouldn't be named anything else.
Reply With Quote
  #152 (permalink)  
Old 01-10-2005, 08:03 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 76
Rep Power: 220
lulu is on a distinguished road

Originally Posted by fatboy
I like this. You laugh at me, then admit you don't know what will happen. That's funny.
I was making a joke. English is not my native language. Where you perceive only banality, I'm having a great time exploring foreign mindsets
Reply With Quote
  #153 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2005, 04:49 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 0
Bond369 is on a distinguished road

The final ISG report details how Iraq hid plans and proscribed imports. It details improved production methods in the chemicals industry, a covert network of laboratories for testing chemicals and poisons. Hidden stores of biological "starter kits" and a covert uranium enrichment programme. All of these, and more, constitute violations of at least one of the 17 UNSCRs on Iraq.
I assume all this was verified with ground inspectors?
Also reason for war Bush gave was that Iraq is immidiate threath to US.
Because you don't have a case. It was a legal war. It was a continuation of hostilities due to Iraq's non-compliance with the cease-fire.
Wasnt that up to UN to decide? Or can US decide for entire UN now?
If you want to contest that, then I suggest you have your representatives press the matter.
My representatives are busy sucking up to US. I also dont care anymore. People are completly fucked up already. They can barely think for themselfs...
So, because your government stood up to the evil US, they're not pawns? But when another country believes contrary to yours, they're pawns? Like I said, you're arrogant and insulting.
My country did not stood up to US. When US asked for support (moral support only), US got it.
Since I think Europe and it's leaders are greedy, spineless jack-offs who, though recognizing a threat, are too scared, or making too much money to do anything about it.
Well u got the "greedy" part right. Rest depends on a country.
If you're going to claim that the US doesn't value democracy, and offer up non-democratic governments as proof, then stick with the analogy. Show me a democratic government, that had a national vote (as you must have in a democracy), yet went against the citizenry's wishes.
Not sure about other countries but here we didnt even have a vote on this. Our foreing minister openly supported US in its case against Iraq without any permition by president/parlament/people. When ppl started bitching about it we got a short explanation and nothing was done.
Spain also comes to mind since its involvment lead to change in goverment.
Really? Turkey wants to be a democracy? Since when?
Dunno. But afaik they have elections to chose their leader. Thats rather large part of democracy.
Then give me another explanation. Why is it that changes to the Kyoto Protocal were verbotten when the US was at the negotiating table, but accepted without question when Europe realized they wouldn't get the desired pound of flesh from the US?
Dunno nor do i care. But claiming its envy... really dun think politicians with a brain would get that low. As far as population(in my country) goes... definatly no envy at all. Closer to pity than envy. But we do have few rare examples that see US as gods gift to humanity.
So the science is already figured out, eh? I thought lulu said it was "very much NOT figured out."
There is still lot in sience thats not figured out, but that part is. Fusion reactor "exploding" would do relativly minimal damage.
And what effects of our pollution are you feeling? What world-wide destruction has the US wreaked? Please, be specific and bring proof.
US is on the other side of the world. Any polution there is shadowed by European polution. Also polution that actually does serious damage to enviroment cant be fealt since it takes decades for it to show damage.
Yep, the US did specifically claim that Iraq had WMD. So did France, Germany, Russia, China - all members of the UNSC. They voted unanimously to have Iraq prove she did not. (Which makes me wonder, if my leaders knew there was a threat and chose not to act, what would that make them?)
All of em claimed Iraq had wmd? Never heard of it.
I also remember Iraq gave full access to inspectors to everything and provided paper evidence (iirc US "hijacked" those papers to take a look b4 others and passed em on later). All "evidence" US provided was refuted by inspectors that were in Iraq.
The ISG report proves that Iraq was what the US claimed all along - a growing threat that was in violation of UN resolutions and needed to be dealt with.
A threath? lol
Well that was proved during war...
I like this. You laugh at me, then admit you don't know what will happen. That's funny.
Well i do know and for it to explode it would have to be designed to explode(talking about large explosion).
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:19 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999-2008, Bluegoop.

A vBSkinworks Design

SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0