You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who do you want to win the war?
- Thread starter OPTIONAL777
- Start date
Quote from alfonso:
Oh come off it. When has there EVER been an established link between Iraq and 9.11?
That is pure fantasy.
By the way, in criminal cases, it in necessary to FIRST prove guilt BEFORE administering punishment. Oh, but proving guilt would be 'divulging sources'. Hmm, I wonder if all prosecutors should start using that one.
Hey fonzy, the guilty party is terrorism.
they're working on it:Quote from alfonso:
By the way, in criminal cases, it in necessary to FIRST prove guilt BEFORE administering punishment. Oh, but proving guilt would be 'divulging sources'. Hmm, I wonder if all prosecutors should start using that one.
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism_militias/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.html
Quote from ElCubano:
I agree we may have overstepped our boundary here, I was against the War because of the sending of our young troops period ( it is hard for a mother to watch a son or daughter go of to war ).....but the fact remains that we are at War and we need to show more support to our soldiers ( which are there wether they like it or not ). Besides this isnt about 9-11 and we dont have to prove guilt agasint the Saddam Regime, they have been in violation for many many years. Getting back to your criminal case example, if you are on probation ( because you have been sentenced meaning you are already guilty) and you fuck up on any of the rules of your probation you go back to jail.......peace
Well, Cubano, I respectfully disagree with you. As I said in my first post, I would prefer an Iraqi victory.
I think that's the only way America will be forced to reassess its self-styled position as global arbiter of right and wrong. (And given the not insignificant amount of self-interest involved, such a position makes me want to puke!)
And before the hotheads start denouncing me for my callous disregard for the American lives that would be lost in a failed invasion (not that I think there's very much possibility of it failing, mind you), my heart equally bleeds for the thousands of PATRIOTIC (since you all love that word) Iraqis dying as we speak, defending their home land against a foreign invasion.
As for the criminal example, I was referring to Optional's unsubstantiated claim that Iraq had anything to do with 9.11.
Oh, and the rules of the probation were determined by -- see if you can remember this institution -- the United NATIONS; not the United STATES. But I guess there was some rule I forgot to read that says is the UN disagrees with the US, the US position prevails. (By the way, I'm looking, but I still can't find that rule...)
Quote from alfonso:
I don't understand comp. Did I ever claim otherwise?
Once terrorism has been PROVEN to occur, that is.
Now, did you have any evidence establishing Iraqi complicity in 9.11?
So we are in agreement, that if there is proof of a connection between Iraq and 911, then the war is justified, right?
Quote from OPTIONAL777:
I understand what you are saying.
However, if in fact Saddam and his regime did sponsor terrorism, that would that provide justification, correct?
In that case I would consider it possible that yes, it may be justifiable.
It isn't really something that there is a great deal of precedent for, in the modern era; attacking another sovereign NATION for something that its citizens are responsible for.
It's a difficult call.
It opens a whole new can of worms in international relations. India attacking Pakistan becomes entirely justifiable, for example.
I suspect, however, that American intends that this 'terrorism is justification' rule is solely for her own use.
Quote from alfonso:
I don't understand comp. Did I ever claim otherwise?
Once terrorism has been PROVEN to occur, that is.
Now, did you have any evidence establishing Iraqi complicity in 9.11?
We are at war with Terrorism, sadamm terrorizes his people so he is a terrorist. We are at war with a terrorist. That is enough proof. We declared war against terrorism and Iraq fits the bill.
Believe it or not I feel much better now that we are on the path too distruction for peace. It sounds funny I know, but it will be a peacfull solution for the US once we rid the world of these people. It is unfortunate that other countries did nopt support us, who will they turn too when they get attacked?
Quote from compisnada2002:
We are at war with Terrorism, sadamm terrorizes his people so he is a terrorist. We are at war with a terrorist. That is enough proof. We declared war against terrorism and Iraq fits the bill.
Believe it or not I feel much better now that we are on the path too distruction for peace. It sounds funny I know, but it will be a peacfull solution for the US once we rid the world of these people. It is unfortunate that other countries did nopt support us, who will they turn too when they get attacked?
One more thing, this will teach people....
NOT TOO FUCK WITH THE USA or we will fuck your country up!
That is a pretty good/clear message that I think will be recieved well.
I personally would rather have other people die than Americans if that is what it is going to take.