watching Bush on TV this evening I couldn't help but wonder...
-
Chris Losinger wrote: and, if GWB is willing to invade Iraq without UN approval, how can he claim to do it in the name of a UN resolution (either 1441 or those from the first gulf war)? if you don't follow the rules and decisions of the UN except when they agree with you, how can you claim to be acting on their behalf? A: you can't. We are still a soveriegn nation and if we deem it necessary to attack in self-defense then the UN be damned.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiJason Henderson wrote: We are still a soveriegn nation and if we deem it necessary to attack in self-defense then the UN be damned. In 1946, during the Nuremberg trial, one of the charges was "Crime against Peace". Attacking a country without the UN approval is IMHO a crime against Peace. Let's see if GWB and his Bushettes (Blair, Aznar, Berlusconi...) will face such a trial in the future.
Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Would you rather it didn't? i would prefer that it only changed things that are actually relevant. Iraq is not relevant. -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
Chris Losinger wrote: Iraq is not relevant. How do you know this? This is as much a speculation as any other opinion I have seen so far. It seems to me you use this as a conduit for your own personal hang-ups with GWB in much the same way people used Monica as a means to ridicule Clinton. However, as you are surely non-republican, I am sure you can defend the actions of his predecessor. :~ Or are you simply a member of some liberal or green commie party and take no sides but simply aim to complain? As an American citizen, I would not want my leaders to take un-necessary risk when it comes to my saftey. However, it is your right, as an American, to complain and state your opinion, and I respect that. However, if it gets so bad as to claim you are no longer proud to be an American, by all means, feel free to leave. - Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Then there was that 9/11 thing that happened. Now we are in self-defense mode and we will remove anyone that supports terror from power A terror attack by some radical Muslims caused the US to turn to self-defense" mode. Why does self-defense justify an attack on Iraq whithout knowing whether there's any relation to Quaeda? You can't attack any country that could possibly have any connection to terrorists without any evidence. Hope this attitude won't last for long.
We are men. We are different. We have only one word for soap. We do not own candles. We have never seen anything of any value in a craft shop. We do not own magazines full of photographs of celebrities with their clothes on. - Steve
Schlaubi wrote: Why does self-defense justify an attack on Iraq whithout knowing whether there's any relation to Quaeda? There is more to terrorism than Al Quaeda - Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
-
Chris Losinger wrote: Iraq is not relevant. How do you know this? This is as much a speculation as any other opinion I have seen so far. It seems to me you use this as a conduit for your own personal hang-ups with GWB in much the same way people used Monica as a means to ridicule Clinton. However, as you are surely non-republican, I am sure you can defend the actions of his predecessor. :~ Or are you simply a member of some liberal or green commie party and take no sides but simply aim to complain? As an American citizen, I would not want my leaders to take un-necessary risk when it comes to my saftey. However, it is your right, as an American, to complain and state your opinion, and I respect that. However, if it gets so bad as to claim you are no longer proud to be an American, by all means, feel free to leave. - Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
Nitron wrote: How do you know this? because, out of all the places in the world where we do find al-Q, Iraq isn't one of them. Pakistan: sold nuke tech to NK, harbors al-Q, led by a military dictator. Iran: buys missiles and warships from NK, controlled by a group of Islamists, hates the US, and is a huge al-Q supporter. Syria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, etc: all controlled by dictators or Islamist governments, all sources of al-Q funding, harbor and recruiting. and, even if Saddam is making bio-chem weapons, it's not like he's the only place in the world where a budding terrorist could get them - indeed it would be much easier to get such things from a government that was friendly to al-Q's stated mission (Islamic world rule), not a secular infidel like Saddam. as to your "There's more to terrorism than Al Queda" remark: not to the US; not as far as anyone outside the CIA knows. but if going after all terrorists is now our goal, explain why we aren't sending 200K troops to kill the Palestinians, or the IRA, or the Colombians, or the Pakistani/Indian factions. Nitron wrote: However, as you are surely non-republican, I am sure you can defend the actions of his predecessor no offense, but that's a totally stupid thing to say. regardless of what Rush would have you believe, there is more than one dimension in politics. for all you know, i could be a registered republican who just doesn't believe it's all about Party Politics and fawning over the guy in charge simply because he has an (R) next to his name on the tele-captions. maybe i sincerly think GWB is a blathering idiot and/or a danger to our and other countries, regardless of his party affiliation or declared political leanings. you know, not every Republican in the country thinks GWB is doing a good job. and by the same token, i don't think Clinton did everything right. i didn't like a lot of things that came from his administration (DMCA, Sonny Bono Copyright Act, etc). truth is, i am registered as a democrat, but that is totally irrelevant since i have the right to vote any way i choose (within the limits of NC ballot laws, of course). and, it has nothing to do with my feelings that GWB is leading the country into a shitload of trouble. Nitron wrote: However, if it gets so bad as to claim you are no longer proud to be an American, by all means, feel free to leave. golly. thanks mister. but instead, i'll just wait my turn to
-
Cathy wrote: Oh gee how could I have missed that? The man is doing everything humanly possible to get us into a war with Iraq. No he isn't. He is doing his job, nothing more. Al Gore would be doing the same thing right now if he had been elected. Anyone would. Of course, I'm sure if it were a Democrat in there, you would behind him all the way. "My job is to protect America" George W. Bush.
Stan Shannon wrote: I'm sure if it were a Democrat in there, you would behind him all the way. and i'm sure you'd be against him all the way. -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
-
Nitron wrote: How do you know this? because, out of all the places in the world where we do find al-Q, Iraq isn't one of them. Pakistan: sold nuke tech to NK, harbors al-Q, led by a military dictator. Iran: buys missiles and warships from NK, controlled by a group of Islamists, hates the US, and is a huge al-Q supporter. Syria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, etc: all controlled by dictators or Islamist governments, all sources of al-Q funding, harbor and recruiting. and, even if Saddam is making bio-chem weapons, it's not like he's the only place in the world where a budding terrorist could get them - indeed it would be much easier to get such things from a government that was friendly to al-Q's stated mission (Islamic world rule), not a secular infidel like Saddam. as to your "There's more to terrorism than Al Queda" remark: not to the US; not as far as anyone outside the CIA knows. but if going after all terrorists is now our goal, explain why we aren't sending 200K troops to kill the Palestinians, or the IRA, or the Colombians, or the Pakistani/Indian factions. Nitron wrote: However, as you are surely non-republican, I am sure you can defend the actions of his predecessor no offense, but that's a totally stupid thing to say. regardless of what Rush would have you believe, there is more than one dimension in politics. for all you know, i could be a registered republican who just doesn't believe it's all about Party Politics and fawning over the guy in charge simply because he has an (R) next to his name on the tele-captions. maybe i sincerly think GWB is a blathering idiot and/or a danger to our and other countries, regardless of his party affiliation or declared political leanings. you know, not every Republican in the country thinks GWB is doing a good job. and by the same token, i don't think Clinton did everything right. i didn't like a lot of things that came from his administration (DMCA, Sonny Bono Copyright Act, etc). truth is, i am registered as a democrat, but that is totally irrelevant since i have the right to vote any way i choose (within the limits of NC ballot laws, of course). and, it has nothing to do with my feelings that GWB is leading the country into a shitload of trouble. Nitron wrote: However, if it gets so bad as to claim you are no longer proud to be an American, by all means, feel free to leave. golly. thanks mister. but instead, i'll just wait my turn to
Sorry Chris. :rose: My last comment was uncalled for. I understand there is never a solution that will please everyone, and all I can say is that I can never imagine myself as a politician. I think I'll stick to CP and C++. ;) - Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
-
Stan Shannon wrote: I'm sure if it were a Democrat in there, you would behind him all the way. and i'm sure you'd be against him all the way. -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
Chris Losinger wrote: and i'm sure you'd be against him all the way. Yep, and proud of it. "My job is to protect America" George W. Bush.
-
http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=2605&searchkw=Phillipin&sd=12%2F7%2F2002&ed=3%2F7%2F2003&select=435675&df=100#xx435675xx This is the post with a link to the Phillipine Terrorist story. [EDIT]Sorry I screwed that up. Here is the link[^].[/EDIT]
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiThat's interesting .... I wonder why I didn't here about it in our media, but possibly I've overlooked it :confused: So thx for your hint :rose:
We are men. We are different. We have only one word for soap. We do not own candles. We have never seen anything of any value in a craft shop. We do not own magazines full of photographs of celebrities with their clothes on. - Steve
-
Sorry Chris. :rose: My last comment was uncalled for. I understand there is never a solution that will please everyone, and all I can say is that I can never imagine myself as a politician. I think I'll stick to CP and C++. ;) - Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
Nitron wrote: I can never imagine myself as a politician. I think I'll stick to CP and C++. some days , i feel the same way. :) :beer: -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
-
Brad Jennings wrote: Last I checked "forthrightly" is not in the dictionary. You check that often? :rolleyes: Paul We all will feed the worms and trees
So don't be shy - Queens of the Stone Age, Mosquito SongPaul Riley wrote: You check that often? :laugh: Brad Jennings "if the golden arches shut shop, where else are the VB people going to get work." - Colin Davies
-
Cathy wrote: Unfortunatly politicians lie, especially this one. My goodness, why aren't we trying to have him impeached. From this as a standard we would have to remove all politician of all countries. A little impractical. Your bias in stating Bush is more of a liar than previous is showing. Cathy wrote: Is he doing his job or lining his pockets and carrying out personal grudges? I could honestly say this sounds just as much like a complaint against Clinton as Bush. Cathy wrote: I also don't believe the bible can be taken literally. Then why did you start the thread implying he was not following his GOD. Cathy wrote: Ok I just read it. It sounds like he told them to defend themselves. A) The US was attacked on 9/11. (I am not saying the link ot Iraq has been shown, just noting in Bush's statements this is defense.) B) Kuwait was attacked and the US was asked to help defend it. The current situation is a continuation of those events so is still in defense. ""
Statement A: The Al-Qaeda Iraq connection had been floated; and could never be proved to the satisfaction of other countries; like it could be in the case of Afghanistan. There is no defence in this Iraq situation at all. It is just a "take down at any cost" agenda that has been a mission to many in the Bush administration even when Clinton was President. It has nothing to do with 9/11; or defence against the people who did it. Statement B: If a UN resolution is infringed, UN security council has to take action; not a member state. It would be like one citizen saying that our DA and police are bad; so we will decide who to prosecute and do justice. In 1991, there was a UN resolution to start a war and liberate Iraq. In 2003, there is no consensus about the "imminent" threat that Saddam poses to anyone. Even Kuwait and Iran is not that worried. Israel is also much less vocal about this. If United States feels that their security is infringed by Iraq (case A) - and that there is a sustained effort from Iraq to sabotage United States; then the decision to bypass United Nations can be justified to an extent. Otherwise, it is just a bad excuse - given because they know that every other country is practical enough to keep out of a war that does not concern them directly. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Schlaubi wrote: The Iraqi disarmament is still a controversional topic - nobody could show evidences for or against it. Each of Hans Blix's reports to the UN state that he has yet to account for the chemical and biological weapons he is known to possess. Schlaubi wrote: However, the weapon inspectors seem to have failed in their plans to completely disarm Iraq. It was NOT THEIR JOB to disarm Iraq. It WAS THEIR JOB to verify that he had. Schlaubi wrote: But the question is whether he's really that dangerous Bush claims him to be. No it is not. The question is, "has he disarmed". Schlaubi wrote: I fear there're countries more dangerous for the world, Iran, North Korea... - you think the UN is up to that? Schlaubi wrote: Yeah, as other countries did. Proof? Mike
The job of enforcing a UN resolution is with the UN security council. If 3/5th of the vecto votes in SC is against it, it should not be done. You can call it whatever you want; but enforcing a UN resolution calling UN itself irrelevent is illogical and pure BS. Iran has not attacked a single country in its modern history. Its elected government was overthrown by US and British - and changed them into a dictatorship; and now they have an Islamic government. Other than "buying" not selling weapons from North Korea, you have no other case against them. There have been so many people arrested in Europe and United States for links to terrorism - does that make these countries terrorist sponsors? If terrorism can originate from Pakistan; and Pakistan is not a terrorist state, how can Iran be one? Just because they practise Islamic law. North Korea. China tells us that they are willing to destroy any nuclear weapons they have; and not pursue it if US agrees to a non-agression pact. The sudden change of mind seems to be a self-defense scheme of Kim, when he sees what is happening to Iraq. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Stan Shannon wrote: "My job is to protect America" George W. Bush. other memorable quotes: "We're not into nation-building." "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." "I'm going to talk about making sure we strengthen the military, we strengthen our alliances, we strengthen the international economy through free trade." (one out of three ain't bad?) GWB
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
"They want to control Social Security, like it's some kind of government program." - GWB Ty
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Albert Einstein
-
what diety he is talking about. He said he's praying for guidance about Iraq. I'm thinking there is no way God would direct him to start a war with anyone. Only Satan wants wars. Conclusion: Bush must be a Satan Worshiper. Cathy Life's uncertain, have dessert first!
Cathy wrote: Bush must be a Satan Worshiper. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Well the Psalms is filled with either Prasing God or ask for his enemies/"the wicked" to be crushed to dust. Also "Holy Wars" was thrown out so now anyone can yell Holy War (cough cough cough what Bin Laden did), but the US can't "seperation of Church and State." And plus people don't want to fight for oil.. -Steven
CPA
CodeProject Addict
By reading this message you are held fully responsible for any of the mispelln's or grammer, issues, found on, codeproject.com.
For those who were wondering, actual (Linux) Penguins were harmed in creating this message.
Visit Ltpb.8m.com
404Browser (Efficient, Fast, Secure Web Browser): 404Browser.com -
Cathy wrote: Ok I just read it. It sounds like he told them to defend themselves. I also don't believe the bible can be taken literally. You slam Bush for being a Satan worshiper (when you clearly know nothing about his christian religion), then you go and make a statement like this. I'll be sure to not take anything you say literally from now on.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiJason Henderson wrote: I'll be sure to not take anything you say literally from now on. ok. Jason Henderson wrote: when you clearly know nothing about his christian religion Hey! I went to Catacism and did my first communion. Seriously what about the sixth commandment "Thou shall not kill". The referenced material contradicts this. Can't take it literally. There is a great book "Sermon on the Mount" by Emmett Fox about this. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060628626/104-5977660-9239951?vi=glance[^] The commandment wins. The other was taken out of context. The story's aim was not that God thinks war is great. We are all his children equally. It makes him sad when we hurt each other. Cathy Life's uncertain, have dessert first!
-
Jason Henderson wrote: I'll be sure to not take anything you say literally from now on. ok. Jason Henderson wrote: when you clearly know nothing about his christian religion Hey! I went to Catacism and did my first communion. Seriously what about the sixth commandment "Thou shall not kill". The referenced material contradicts this. Can't take it literally. There is a great book "Sermon on the Mount" by Emmett Fox about this. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060628626/104-5977660-9239951?vi=glance[^] The commandment wins. The other was taken out of context. The story's aim was not that God thinks war is great. We are all his children equally. It makes him sad when we hurt each other. Cathy Life's uncertain, have dessert first!
There is a distinction between war and murder. Also, the old testament law condoned capital punishment. War stinks, but sometimes war is inevitable and necessary. We live in an imperfect world filled with imperfect people. That will never change. We will never become more enlightened and obtain perpetual peace (not on our own at least). Until you realize that, I doubt that you will understand the motivation for this or any war.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Blaming religion seems a popular reason to start war - always has been. I guess leaders think that if they tell the general population they are going to war under their "god's" guidance, their people will automatically feel justified in the action. Quite ridiculous, as you say.
I may try to delete my CP cookies. But its almost like tossing the keys of the appartment into the river. - Andreas Saurwein
Megan Forbes wrote: I guess leaders think that if they tell the general population they are going to war under their "god's" guidance, their people will automatically feel justified in the action. Quite ridiculous, as you say. Are you suggesting the President of the U.S. is feeding the Media propaganda? Later,
JoeSox
www.joeswammi.com
Killing In The Name[^] -
Amen - except Gore would have to consult with a fashion consultant first to find out how to look manly. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: except Gore would have to consult with a fashion consultant first to find out how to look manly Whereas Bush wouldn't bother, he's obviously quite happy with his chimpish good looks.
Bruce Duncan, CP#9088, CPUA 0xA1EE, Sonork 100.10030
Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made of iron.