19 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716Your ignorance knows no bounds.
The Useless Nations(UN) are only good at one thing, bashing the United States and her allies, inclucding the Brits.
After all, if they were any good at anything , they could have solved the problem in Bosnia without military force. Or here is even a easier one for the Useless Nations. Bringing peace and ending the slaughter and oppression in Dafur. Un ...[text shortened]... they will continue to do the same. The only other good thing they can do is beg for money ....
What's more is you seem incredibly proud of your inability to read, comprehend, and think logically.
Just keep spouting whatever you heard on MSNBC, I'm sure everything will get along fine without your original input.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by RamnedIf only GWB would come out and say this is a war on Muslims. He could not say that then (2001 to 2003) and he can't say it now. If you are attacking the muslim faith - you do not attack Iraq.
The war of religion is !!NOT!! the fault of the US. Since desert storm, when we left some troops to insure that Hussein would end attacks on Sudan, Bin Laden took religious offense.
The US stands where it until Iraq's gov't is strong enough to exist properly. We are not fighting Bin Laden. We are not there to attack. We are there for Iraq.
I support George Bush.
I agree that now Iraq needs help in getting back on its feet after it was pulverised by the invasion.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by Rajk999No, My mum like me has been ardently against this war from when it was first mooted in early 2002.
Your mommy is from Iraq .... corrrect ?
This war is not carried out in our name.
My mum does care for the people less well off than ourluckyselves. She has a heart.
An Iraqi life has equal value to an American life.
War must be avoided if at all possible. As with everything else in life the poor suffer much more in war than the rich.
Compassion for others is a good thing.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by mdhallI don watch PMSNBC... its a home for liberal tripe
Your ignorance knows no bounds.
What's more is you seem incredibly proud of your inability to read, comprehend, and think logically.
Just keep spouting whatever you heard on MSNBC, I'm sure everything will get along fine without your original input.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716You do know that the US is a key member of the UN ie a Useless Nation?
The Useless Nations(UN) are only good at one thing, bashing the United States and her allies, inclucding the Brits.
After all, if they were any good at anything , they could have solved the problem in Bosnia without military force. Or here is even a easier one for the Useless Nations. Bringing peace and ending the slaughter and oppression in Dafur. Unfortunately, they can't even manage that.
I don't see the US doing much about Dafur either, maybe its because there is no oil there?
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716Indeed? For a country that despises the UN, the U.S. can be VERY active in it when it wants to be.
The Useless Nations(UN) are only good at one thing, bashing the United States and her allies, inclucding the Brits.
After all, if they were any good at anything , they could have solved the problem in Bosnia without military force. Or here is even a easier one for the Useless Nations. Bringing peace and ending the slaughter and oppression in Dafur. Un ...[text shortened]... they will continue to do the same. The only other good thing they can do is beg for money ....
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa03.html
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by steponupIt is known Saddam had Sarin gas. Perhaps surplus was left over after the Kurd genocide. Is Sarin now showing up in places to where is was transported?
Should George Bush be tried and sent to prison for attacking Iraq without any provocation.
Did he lie intentionally so he could attack Iraq?
"Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in Jane's Defence Weekly, which reported that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed. According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
19 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by invigorateThis offers an interesting insight into your world view & beliefs.
[b]It is ironic that it is fine for a US lead coalition to take this muderous action yet it is not OK for Iran to develop similar technology that the US has had for 50 years.
Since you say it should be "OK" for Iran to defvelop equal "murderous technology". Lets shorten the time frame.
USA has more nuclear weapons than it could possibly need. Obviously, it would be considered "fair" to you if Iran were given nuclear armament by USA to equalize technology.
Who are the others you feel have the right to "equal" nuclear arms? Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Egypt?? They are surely as deserving as the Iranians! 🙄
19 Sep 07
Every nation has the natural right to pursue self-defense, so it's not a discussion. It's a reality.
If a country in the M.E. wants nuclear weapons, it's a matter of dealing with one of the power nations that has them: US or Russia. Then it's a matter of the other country trying to stop it from happening.
The US is not the first super power to engage in a resource and economically draining occupation in the middle east, and nothing will be different about our experience. It's a diverse and complex political area. No ones going to roll in there and and "fix" it.
It would be like taking on a mission to unify Africa (or Yurop for that matter -- remember that didn't work for Germany very well and no one's letting them forget it).
ps-still laughing at SMS for bashing the UN.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by MacSwainI do not advocate Iran having nuclear technology. I was merely pointing out that US is hardly in a position to take a moral lead when asking Iran to show restraint in the development of nuclear facilities.
This offers an interesting insight into your world view & beliefs.
Since you say it should be "OK" for Iran to defvelop equal "murderous technology". Lets shorten the time frame.
USA has more nuclear weapons than it could possibly need. Obviously, it would be considered "fair" to you if Iran were given nuclear armament by USA to equalize technology ...[text shortened]... s? Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Egypt?? They are surely as deserving as the Iranians! 🙄
As the poster between us points out - every country has the right to defend itself.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by invigoratePosted by Invigorate:
[b]I do not advocate Iran having nuclear technology.
""yet it is not OK for Iran to develop similar technology that the US has had for 50 years.""
Which is it??? Please take one side or the other, you aren't allowed to take both sides of an argument! 😉
First you find fault with it not being "OK" for Iran to develop nukes....Now you do not "Advocate" Iranian nukes.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadNice job at avoidiung the question.....
You do know that the US is a key member of the UN ie a Useless Nation?
[b]After all, if they were any good at anything , they could have solved the problem in Bosnia without military force. Or here is even a easier one for the Useless Nations. Bringing peace and ending the slaughter and oppression in Dafur. Unfortunately, they can't even manage that.
I don't see the US doing much about Dafur either, maybe its because there is no oil there?[/b]
In your humble opinion, name 5 situations where the UN through diplomacy has succeeded in stopping or avoiding armed conflict.
Please be specific.
Yes, I'm quite aware the Unites States is a member of the UN and as I recall the prime financial supporter for them. Ain't it a shame ....
Its time to disband the organization or severely reform it. Personally, I don't think it has much chance of ever being useful. I think we should ask all te occupants in the building in NY to go home in 30 days so the building can be converted into something useful. Like apt building for the homeless and poor of the United States. Additionally, the money the US give to the UN should be cutoff and reallocated, 50% goes to the DOD and 50% goes for providing food and medical services for the occupants living in the new apartment building on the East River.
Works for me, how about you?
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716The classic troll post.
Nice job at avoidiung the question.....
In your humble opinion, name 5 situations where the UN through diplomacy has succeeded in stopping or avoiding armed conflict.
Please be specific.
How is your ignorance of the UN and its history anyone's responsibility to address but yours? If you don't know what the UN is and what the UN does, you can do the same thing everyone else does: learn.
Furthermore: there's no opinions necessary.
So far, all you have done is demonstrate what you don't know and how that's everyone else's burden to teach you.
19 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716Read this, then see what you think about the U.N.
Nice job at avoidiung the question.....
In your humble opinion, name 5 situations where the UN through diplomacy has succeeded in stopping or avoiding armed conflict.
Please be specific.
Yes, I'm quite aware the Unites States is a member of the UN and as I recall the prime financial supporter for them. Ain't it a shame ....
Its time to disband th ...[text shortened]... pants living in the new apartment building on the East River.
Works for me, how about you?
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/peacekpg/general/2003/0827blueman.htm
19 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by mdhallObviously you are not any help though, you didn't name 5 instances.
The classic troll post.
How is your ignorance of the UN and its history anyone's responsibility to address but yours? If you don't know what the UN is and what the UN does, you can do the same thing everyone else does: learn.
Furthermore: there's no opinions necessary.
So far, all you have done is demonstrate what you don't know and how that's everyone else's burden to teach you.
So,disregarding your personal insults (a favorite tactic of liberals when they can't prove their point), I have to make the assumption that there are not 5 instances you can point to. If the UN is such a useful body, what I'm asking shouldn't be hard... right?
You have a nice day.