Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie Parker
It's based upon lies...and we have replaced one president. We occupy their nation after "lliberating" them. We force an oil law no one there wants which give 70% of the oil rights to the US and UK.
We were not given permission from the UN to go in....congress absconded its constitutional duty to give Bush this war...Bush violated the constitution by declaring war....
what part of the constitution do you not understand? This war is Illegal. And now that these people are "liberate", we are no better than unwanted occupiers...who do you suppose the insurgents are opposing in Iraq?
|
Now that I've stopped alternately laughing and crying, let me educate you on a couple of items.
1) Where in what book did you read that the U.S. needs the permission of the UN to do a fucking thing let alone defend itself against what it percieves to be a danger directed at either the country itself or it's interests? Since the end of the 'Gulf War' in 1991, there were over 16 UN resolutions demanding that Iraq come clean with it's weapons programs and allow weapons inspectors unfettered access to wherever they wanted go. This was over the course of nearly 15 years and Iraq continually refused to allow the inspectors to do their jobs. The UN being the impotent organization it is, would not even follow it's own resolutions. Look it up if you don't believe it. Finally, bush gave Hussein one last chance to comply with the prior UN resolutions and hussein refused to do it. Take that aside and consdier that he was paying $25,000 to the immediate families of suicide bombers. That they were sponsoring terrorism, torturing their own people, committing mass murder rarely seen on another scale to the extent that they are
still finding mass graves. And most importantly, you might want to read the Volcker reprt which details in percise fashion the corruption, the greed and what happens with the old boy network known as the UN. Basically in short, Hussien was supplying oil vochers to countries like Russia, Germany and Russia (Russia in turn was selling Iraq weaponry). You may recall that those 3 countries along with France who also had their hand in the corrupted world of the "Oil for Food" program were most vocal about going to war with Iraq because they had a very good, illegal deal going. Meanwhile, the purpose of the "Oil for Food" program was to give the hungary (especially children) food in exchange for oil. I'm sure you knew all of that. It's all factual and not opinion. Now, you can say that going to war with Iraq was a bad idea or whatever and that's a fair point if you know how to defend your argument - which you don't. Someone like 'Graybeard' can. Maybe you ought to talk to him to gain some sanity on this issue because you are clearly out of your league here and yet you have the arrogance and the temerity to speak as if you know someting about history. You don't and everytime you post something so stupid that it literally makes me laugh out loud (out of exasperation, not humor) you only sink yourself lower and lower. Furthermore, this has absolutely nothing to do with the tired old "right wing" bullshit. What it has everything to do with is trying to find a solution to see if there is any chance at all of stabilizing that region and then bringing our men and women back home.
2) There is only 1 Commander-in-Chief. Like we saw in Kosovo, when Presdient Clinton took military action, the Congress was not involved in that process. The constitution gives the President the final say on all military matters - not the Congress. Again, you need to educate yourself and learn how to not just form an opinion but how to use facts to defend it. You obviously can't use facts in a lot of your arguments because there are none that support it.
Match, set and game over.
Linear Mode
