Holy double standard. So its hard to believe that the American executive could be motivated by money for their reasons to go into Iraq, and to think so would be a conspiracy theory, but its easy to consider that the international community is responsible for a multi-national conspiracy to keep the United States out of Iraq???
Uhhh...Lanny?
The security council...15 countries that make it up....are the ones that didnt vote to support the action. That included Russia....the ones who supplied Hussein with planes, weaponry of all kinds, as well were purchasing oil, and had many a contract with Hussein to keep the oil flowing that they could. This isnt a guess on my part, its plain and simple fact. Germany, whom also were skirting the oil for food program and France the country that was also selling weaponry along with buying oil. They all voted against the action. Others on the Security council actually voted FOR it, so dont be sounding like it was some unanimous decision from the international community...it wasnt.
And I thought they okayed these resolutions based on what transpired during the Gulf War, and supported these same resolutions for search purposes. If they were sure of the data that was presented they would have okayed the military action in Iraq. They thought what Powell presented was BS and voted to not support him.
No, the last resolution occurred in 1998 when Hussein booted the weapons inspectors OUT of the country. When he refused to ALLOW searches. Its in those books you read somewhere...have a look. Powell talked to the UN...so did Bush.
The UN should be the all saying power in regards to interventions into other countries, especially when one of the permanent Security Counsel members are involved. How else does the world prevent the Super Powers from dancing all over the globe at will?
Is this the same UN that allowed the whole Iraq situation to get to where it was in the first place? Is this the same one that has you yelling off the rooftop right now about Sudan?
So you want them to go into Sudan...but not Iraq? Wow, nice double standard there my friend...unfortunately it blows your entire argument to smithereens. I would love to see the US go into Sudan and stop senseless deaths....but they are somewhat busy elsewhere in the world...so why not have the UN take care of that? I know why and so do you...they are an outdated and useless diplomacy orginization that has the backbone of a jellyfish. Thats why.
Nice double standard again. You preach containment with North Korea, which is an actual threat and HAS WMDs they could use right now AND are developing a missle system capable of reaching the United States, but say containment was not working with Iraq and invasion was needed to flesh out WMDs that had not been found in a decade of searching and did not have a delivery mechanism that could guarantee delivery to Isreal let alone the United States?
What freaking containment Lanny??? They were BOOTED OUT of Iraq in 1998. WTF are you talking about. Where exactly was the military presence of the US in the middle east to contain him again? Geezuz...now your making stuff up.
Well numbnuts, a lot of these guys have already survived through the Reagan and Bush 41 administrations, are through to the Bush 43 administration, and are running the show, so what is so hard to believe that they would not make it through to the next administrations? Hey, I'm not the one who sees an international conspiracy to keep the US out of Iraq.
See, im not buying the whole "conspiracy" theory you are losing your mind about, and do not believe for a minute that they are controlling the entire freaking government. For me to believe that, it would mean that somehow they convinced the entire senate of the US to vote for military action...including democrats, and in particular, one named John Kerry who also supported the action.
Numbnuts.
Holy thick as a brick Batman! What part of the United Nations NOT backing the US in Iraq don't you get? If they were sure there was a need to have a military intervention they would have supported the US. They didn't. They thought the US case was horsesh*t. They felt that inspections were more than enough to weed out any WMDs, even though in a decade they had found jack. Oh wait, we do have to take into consideration the international conspiracy that is going on to keep the US out of Iraq!
Who is thick here? I am well aware the Security Council voted NOT to support a US led invasion...i got that. I have explained why numerous times, aint spelling it out again for you.
And exactly WHAT inspections " were more than enough to weed out any WMDs"?? There were NONE going on UNTIL the threat of invasion from the US ya twit. Good grief....read your books again.
BTW... I guess the US didn't think that the sanctions were near enough? That's funny, because it didn't stop the US from keeping sanctions in place against Cuba for 40 years. Again, the US does have an interesting way in dealing with these double standards.
The sanctions in Cuba are working and have for a very long time. The ones in Iraq were not working..because UN MEMBERS were breaking them. Geezuz.
Yeah, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are thankful you lost that remote control.
Huh? Nice judgement there pal...and yet another double standard you use when backed into a corner. Didnt you pen this earlier tonight to someone else?
Quote:
Originally posted by Lanny Macdonald
how about you butt out in regards to where I live. You know nothing about me, nothing about my situation, so I'd advise you to stick to the subject matter.
|
Nothing like contradicting yourself....as I can apply it to you.
I love how you have competely dodged the issues.
ive dodged nothing. Nothing. You on the other hand have YET to answer for that David Kay latter i posted weeks ago as to the existance of WMD in Iraq. You know, the guy that was head inspector in Iraq FOR the UN?
Once again, how is the United States actions in Iraq any different from those of the Nazis and the Soviets? How?
Its answered above...but way to dodge the answer...again.
Unilateral intervention with a bullsh*t coalition is hardly a quality excuse. Then again, which excise are we using this week? WMDs? The tyranical dictator? The threat to the region?
Those were all reasons BEFORE the war Lanny, again as i have pointed out and you have ignored because you cannot refute it.
You are truly hilarious. Bald face denials of things sitting right there for your reading enjoyment.
Oh and because its OK for you to point out how its OK to be a prick with smiley faces when dealing with others on this board.
heres one for you.
