Go back
US declares war on Syria!

US declares war on Syria!

Debates

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by spruce112358
[/b]When Turkey or Switzerland interned belligerents during WWII, neither side made any attempts on those persons because they were "out for the war".

The US is at war with al-Quaida. Therefore:

"A neutral state may not give armed assistance to any belligerent, or lend money, or guarantee a loan to either side, or permit its territory to become a ...[text shortened]... ia can bluster all they want, but Syria is in the wrong. So is Pakistan for the same reason.
If you're going to quote international law, please cite the provision of IL that states a nation state can be in a state of war with an organization.

Thank you.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
If you're going to quote international law, please cite the provision of IL that states a nation state can be in a state of war with an organization.

Thank you.
Not only that, but congress never declared war so they can aide whoever they durn well please.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by scherzo
I officially despise the US military to no end right now. Next week will be better.
You do know that the US military does not decide who to go to war against right?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tomtom232
Not only that, but congress never declared war so they can aide whoever they durn well please.
They can get attacked accordingly.

You can choose to help those who wish to kill our troops, but you can also suffer the consequences.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Eladar
They can get attacked accordingly.

You can choose to help those who wish to kill our troops, but you can also suffer the consequences.
The US has not declared war therefore they cannot go attacking anybody they want do no good reason other than a country is supplying a faction, whom the US is not even at war with, with needed items!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Eladar
They can get attacked accordingly.

You can choose to help those who wish to kill our troops, but you can also suffer the consequences.
So let me get this straight:
If you believe that a country is helping an organization you don't like, then you can illegally enter that country and kill anyone in the vicinity of said organizations 'employees'?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
other American haters (bosse).
I'm neither an American hater nor an America hater.

You are an American hater.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Eladar
They can get attacked accordingly.

You can choose to help those who wish to kill our troops, but you can also suffer the consequences.
Yeah... those 4 kids were really endangering the US army...

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
Isn't the US in the same situation then for backing a million different regimes all over the world?

And are the agreements still the same as before WWII?

And what the hell did those 4 dead children have to do with anything?
Are you seriously justifying the murder of children???
Any warrior knows he is a target 24/7. He knows that when he sits next to a child, he puts that child at risk.

American soldiers would never place children at risk by hanging out next to them. They are far more professional and care far more about kids than that.

Some of the scum we are fighting may have other ideas. That's unfortunate for those kids. If I were the parent of such a kid, I would be outraged at those scum and would move my kid away from them as quickly as possible.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
If you're going to quote international law, please cite the provision of IL that states a nation state can be in a state of war with an organization.

Thank you.
That would be provision 9/11.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tomtom232
Not only that, but congress never declared war so they can aide whoever they durn well please.
I think we have the Japanese to thank for the downfall of the notion of formal "declarations of war".

Similarly, Israel did not declare war before attacking Egypt in 1967.

The declaration of war was probably getting outmoded anyway -- a fairly Victorian notion in an age where surprise and remote airstrikes are key.

Warfare evolves like anything else. Time was, you lined your men up, saluted the enemy, and invited him to fire first (18th century). Imagine.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by spruce112358
Any warrior knows he is a target 24/7. He knows that when he sits next to a child, he puts that child at risk.

American soldiers would never place children at risk by hanging out next to them. They are far more professional and care far more about kids than that.

Some of the scum we are fighting may have other ideas. That's unfortunate for those k ...[text shortened]... I would be outraged at those scum and would move my kid away from them as quickly as possible.
Bull!
These american 'warriors' (aka murderers) are not being hunted down and killed in their homes by soldiers with far superior technology and total disregard for civilian life, so your points are moot.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Out of interest, why were there (at least) 4 children on a construction site?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Quote from The Times today (page 16):

"Reporters who reached the scene yesterday found only the bodies of seven adult males in the mortuary and no sign of any dead children."

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Crowley
Bull!
These american 'warriors' (aka murderers) are not being hunted down and killed in their homes by soldiers with far superior technology and total disregard for civilian life, so your points are moot.
I think you are confusing the people who have a total disregard for human life. It is almost certainly not American soldiers, but more likely those who detonate suicide bombs in heavily crowded markets.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.