You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
The UN Mandate for the "Coalition" presence in Iraq expires on Dec 31 removing any legal basis for the continued presence of US troops in Iraq. The negotiations for a forces agreement between the governments of Iraq and the US are stalled.
I think the odds are very high that Maliki, backed up by his dear friends the Iranians, will take a hard line and hold off against any agreement with the current administration because of their lame duck status.
What are the chances the US govt will support "removing" him, one way or another, from the situation like what was done with Allende, Mosadek and Diem?
Liberals: having cake and eating it too since 1960.
No laughing emoticons? You disappoint.
Do me a favor and put me on Ignore. It's clear you can't handle adult discussion and are here merely to troll.
Bush waged the Iraq war under the pretense of enforcing UN resolutions. Yet, he never received UN authorization for the use of force. Makes him a bit of a hypocrite, huh.
The war was waged on every excuse that could be halfway presented in a serious fashion to the international community. It doesn't matter why- it was going to happen regardless of the world's support for the invasion.
Presenting "reasons" was just lip service to the UN in hopes of making the war seem less haphazard than it really was.
Yellow Cake Uranium
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Mobile Biological Weapons Factories
Nuclear Weapon Development
"Terrorists"
Collusion with Osama
Using chemical weapons that we gave them in the 80s
Being Bad
Aviator Sunglasses and Berets
Do me a favor and put me on Ignore. It's clear you can't handle adult discussion and are here merely to troll.
Bush waged the Iraq war under the pretense of enforcing UN resolutions. Yet, he never received UN authorization for the use of force. Makes him a bit of a hypocrite, huh.
Clearly the pointing out of your double standard hurts, and it should. You posted something hypocritical, wanting your cake and eating it too. Saying that "Bush lied"; "it was about WMD", and now claiming that it was about UN resolutions is pragmatic expediency for you. You don't care to remain consistent or intellectually honest; you use whatever defense you feel like you can, regardless the intellectual bankrupcty of it. It is no wonder to me whatsoever you found the legal profession.
Point of fact: no UN support for the re-invasion of Iraq was necessary. The UN granted support of reinvasion upon Iraq's failure to live up to terms.
Of course, mentioning that wasn't expedient for your argument.
Christ, you two are like a broken record. No one listens to anyone. BTW, Did anyone hear Bush's response to the Supreme Court ruling on GTMO. (Sorry to take the thread off track). I laughed.
Here's a clue for all you libs in la la land. There is no such thing as a legal or illegal war. Nations can do whatever the f--- they want.
Hitler didn't do anything "illegal" he was just being his narcissistic whack job self trying to fulfill his dream of world domination. He has that right if he can get a whole nation to follow him, and we as a nation have every right to blow his psycho a-- to kingdom come.
If Iran wants to build nukes more power to them, but if we then want to wipe them off the face of the earth to keep that from happening, even more power to us.
The world is ruled by the aggressive use of force. Always has been and always will, unless you believe that God is coming back to clean house Himself, since most of you don't, then accept the fact now that whoever has the biggest guns gets to set the rules, so you better hope and pray it's the countries that aren't psychotic or out for world domination that own the best weapons. Right now that is us, when that changes than we will all be screwed.
Their may be moral and immoral reasons for starting a war, but legality is an absurd notion since we don't have a world government and judicial system...yet. God help us when that happens.
In the meantime nations are sovereign entities and can do whatever they please, they just have to be ready for the consequences.
The middle east has been a pain in the a-- to the whole world for decades, so Bush wants to go in and clean some house, I don't have a problem with that. It should have been done a long time ago. Thanks to Carter's passivist appeasement policies the kooks in the middle east have been rattling their sabres with impunity for too long.
Last edited by Starchecker; 06-13-2008 at 09:37 PM.
Allende, Mosadek, Diem, now Maliki?
