Thread: A fact about Iraq ignored by all ... till now

^ I wish there was a posting leftie who could a post a compelling argument. I'm still hoping.

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

The US had full legal international sanction to liberate Iraq.
read here

If anything the USA showed overwhelming restraint.
Saddam thought the USA was bluffing. He was very wrong.

So with respect to those attempting to make the case that the current action is illegal: There is no case.

But they know that.

The intellectual dishonesty practiced by the Bush/america haters is remarkable.

This subject has been covered extensively in the media and on fora.

There was no "legal international sanction" to "liberate Iraq". The ceasefire between Iraq and the US&others could be revoked if certain conditions weren't fullfilled, and war resumed. That's what the US have done, the rest is propaganda.
The agreement of congress in the US and parliament in the UK was brought about by doctored intelligence reports about WMD, contrary to what the UN inspectors advised.

There were indeed breaches, Iraqi airforce repeatedly violating airspace, and the existence of "terrorist training camps" - not sure about the last one, I haven't done any research on it, just responding to 2nd hand info. But I am quite sure no mandate would have been given on these grounds.

Perhaps some intellectual honesty from your side is called for?

Like it or not the "fabricated intelligence" was bought hook, line and sinker by damn near the whole world at the time.

Not by the million people who marched in the UK before the war.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

ike it or not the "fabricated intelligence" was bought hook, line and sinker by damn near the whole world at the time.

Only the fools like yourself and the Faux News drone did. The rest of the world was laughing at your intlelligence. You are suffering from short memory SK, and you also seem to be very intellectually dishonnest or maybe plain ignorant. Who knows.

Originally Posted by benbaaa

Not by the million people who marched in the UK before the war.

I read somewhere that the British should be more ashamed of the whole thing than anybody. Something to do with America being tricked into supporting the war because of our propoganda machine ... but the majority of English knew the real story and still supported it.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by benbaaa

Not by the million people who marched in the UK before the war.

I read somewhere that the British should be more ashamed of the whole thing than anybody. Something to do with America being tricked into supporting the war because of our propoganda machine ... but the majority of English knew the real story and still supported it.

It was still a nobel cause regardless of what these nattering nababs of negativism have to say...

A noble cause ? not really. Nothing noble about destroying people home with a air campaign and invading a country for its oil over a silly pretense. No sir.

You want to be Noble ? why aren't you in Darfur ?

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

... but the majority of English knew the real story and still supported it.

I think you'll find that the majority of people didn't support it in the UK. Even after Blair's excellent speech stating why he believed we should go to war. But, he won over the House of Commons so I guess that's democracy working.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

A noble cause ? not really. Nothing noble about destroying people home with a air campaign and invading a country for its oil over a silly pretense. No sir.

Do you think Saddam should of been left in power then BF ?

^ technically yes. It's not like changing a head of state is a simple task like changing a CEO in a corporation. This is especially true in a dictatorship. You create a political void.

Strangely, this will also be the case after the Bush administration leave office. It will create a political void and will bring cahos to the US political system unless a strong leader like Hillary Clinton is voted into office.

Originally Posted by The Gent

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by benbaaa

Not by the million people who marched in the UK before the war.

I read somewhere that the British should be more ashamed of the whole thing than anybody. Something to do with America being tricked into supporting the war because of our propoganda machine ... but the majority of English knew the real story and still supported it.

It was still a nobel cause regardless of what these nattering nababs of negativism have to say...

Have a look in The Captain's Lounge. Somebody is apparently using a nick you used to use somewhere else... and claiming you have jumped off the Bush train.

Originally Posted by Skulldigger

Have a look in The Captain's Lounge. Somebody is apparently using a nick you used to use somewhere else... and claiming you have jumped off the Bush train.

I have jumped off the Bush train and assumed my normal identity!
Doesn't mean I would, in my wildest dreams, vote for a creature as loathsome as the Hildebeast though.

While you're on that track, Japan... but Iraq is a totally different ballpark. Neither Japan nor Germany had a long continous history of fighting fractions in their near past.

Both of them also had enjoyed relative political stability for many years.

Originally Posted by Skulldigger

While you're on that track, Japan.

I was thinking of Japan, but they left the emporor there ( yea I know that he was'nt the head of the Gov). Anyway lets say post world war 2 then.

It appears some of you would have been good to go with leaving Saddam in power. Ok, that settles it. There is no need to worry about Darfur then.

Hillary doesn't have a chance. She's alienating her own party by saddling up to the Republicans on so many issues.

Here's an idea ... let's go ahead and elect Hillary with the condition her running mate be Bill. The stipulation being that she immediately resign and Bill takes office. That get us around the term limits.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Doesn't mean I would, in my wildest dreams, vote for a creature as loathsome as the Hildebeast though.

You are not there yet but you will. I will make sure you come to love Hillary and vote for her

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Here's an idea ... let's go ahead and elect Hillary with the condition her running mate be Bill. The stipulation being that she immediately resign and Bill takes office. That get us around the term limits.

Here we agree.

Well I think that has been the plan all along. The only reason why Bill has been so supportive of his wife is because this is his only ticket to be back at the WH. You don't think if she get elected, he will stay idle and not mingle in to the state affairs.