|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: War in Iraq, is there a point? | |||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: He's new here, Charles.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6503 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
He tried desperately. In fact, he delayed the war by 6 months in that effort, even going back to the Un for a redundant resolution to 1441 - giving the Hussein loyalists and islamist 6 months to plan their insurgency. Had only Bush known.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
deerbreh Member (Idle past 2923 days) Posts: 882 Joined: |
Millions of us in America support this war... Millions more in America don't support it....Beside the point, anyway. If it is wrong it is wrong even if 99% support it and if it is right it is right even if only 40% support it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6503 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
No, it was iraqis in hussein's mass graves, rape rooms, meat grinders, hell-hole prisons.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Tal Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 1140 From: Fort Bragg, NC Joined: |
I'm growing weary of your ignorant posting, but I'll patiently correct you again.
Why aren't they POW's? Because they don't wear a uniform, or a "distinguishable sign"? That's dishonest and immoral to believe that. Allow me to educate you. Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War: Article 4 A 2 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) That of carrying arms openly; (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Now, to be classified as POW you MUST meet all 4 conditions. Let's see if the typical insurgent meets any of the criteria.
being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates Yes, the arguement can be made that they take orders for higher ups.
That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance Ooo sorry (jeapordy incorrect beep) they don't fit this category.
That of carrying arms openly Ooo sorry again, they don't fit this criteria either.
That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war And since they target civilians (among many other TRUE atrocities) they don't quite make the cut here either. So they fail 3 out of 4 critereon that would make the elligible for POW status.
You shoot an enemy, you disobey God. Where is that?
I'll post a few stories tonight about a taxi driver named Dilawar that was tortured and murdered at Guantanamo bay and a few others. Remember, it doesn't count if it has the Koran flushing story next to it! Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*
|
|||||||||||||||||||
deerbreh Member (Idle past 2923 days) Posts: 882 Joined: |
He tried desperately. In fact, he delayed the war by 6 months... George W. Bush shared his war plans with a Canadian? Do tell.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Tal Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 1140 From: Fort Bragg, NC Joined: |
Hey, can I go to Iraq?
That sense. Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*
|
|||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
deerbreh writes: Beside the point. Nobody's hands were clean, including American companies. It isn't beside the point at all. It is the reason that there would never have been Security Council approval from the UN. There would never have been a UN force because countries with vested interests and things to hide had a veto on the Security Council. Your initial point was that the US should have had UN support. My point is that UN support was an imoossibility.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6503 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
You are assuredly have that right.
The problem is when those opposed believe in conspiracy nutbar stuff, like the war is for oil, Haliburton, Israel, Bush's saudi friends. It's wrong when Americans of the far left simply do not care whether democracy is created in the ME, and are willing to align with Islamists in order to see the US defeated. It is wrong when those opposed lie about bush supposedly lying the nation into war. It is reasonable to argue - even if wrongly - that saving Iraqis from a tyrant is noble, but won't help in the war against islamic terror. It is reasonable to argue - even if wrongly -that creating a democracy in Iraq will not serve the interests of world peace. And so on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4158 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
em...I asked because I was wondering if you'd post something something like that.
let's take a simple example - how would a lance-jack from say the Adjutant General's Corp volunteer to go to Iraq? How does that work?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6503 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
It would appear that you did not follow the news all that time. For if you had, or were you to refresh your memory, you would know that he went back to the UN over and over, and had Powell constantly on the diplomat trail.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
deerbreh Member (Idle past 2923 days) Posts: 882 Joined: |
No, it was iraqis in hussein's mass graves, rape rooms, meat grinders, hell-hole prisons. Huh. I don't remember any of that being used as a reason for invading Iraq before the fact. I DO remember WMDs, 9-11, "Iraqi connections to Al Quaeda," "reconstituted nuclear weapons programs", "yellowcake from Niger", "aluminum centrifuge tubes", "drones that could reach the U.S.", and "mobile biological labs", - NONE of which turned up in Iraq. So we INVADED Iraq just to get rid of Saddam? Kind of like using a pile driver as a tack hammer, dontcha think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
docpotato Member (Idle past 5077 days) Posts: 334 From: Portland, OR Joined: |
So my question is, should those of us who see something morally wrong about the way this war is being conducted, or for that matter, see something morally wrong about the fact that we are in Iraq at all honor our responsibility to voice our opinion or should we be silent and tacitly endorse something we find morally offensive in the interests of supporting our nation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Funny how none of those things bothered the US when the Shah of Iran or Pinochet were using them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I don't really see where most of what you posted has to do with the question. I think you're getting both ahead of the argument and also confusing the issue.
Let me try to reword some of what I've said and see if it makes more sense. First, we did invade Iraq and Afganistan. Those are past actions. We can't change the past. We're stuck trying to minimize the harm that will be done. But ...
GDR writes: When there is no longer the threat of terrorism from that country there will no longer be troops. IMHO that's a very shortsighted tactic and also one designed for failure.
The goal in Iraq is again to establish a democratically elected local gov't and get out. Again, that's another one that IMHO is simply designed to fail. Now that we've invaded and overthrown the governments in these two countries, I think our selfinterest and even honor says that we need to be sure that they get beyond simply having a democratically elected government. We need to stick it out until they are viable. That could well be 50 years, will certainly be decades at a minimum. But those actions have absolutely nothing to do with the issue of terrorism. Does that make any sense or should I try rewording it again? This message has been edited by jar, 08-23-2005 05:27 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024