 |
|
11-13-2007, 07:34 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,696
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnthepainter
smitty0311,,,,,,nice to meet you here jarhead,,,,,semper fi
johnthepainter>>>0331
|
Semper fi???
Man you boys are gay as hell.
Why not just bend him over and lick his ass fag?
TRAITORS.
Enemy's of America!
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you STUPID republicunts try to hurl that label at my feet, 'Liberal,' as if it were something to be ashamed of, something dirty, something to run away from, it won't work because I will pick up that label and I will wear it as a badge of honor.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
11-16-2007, 09:58 AM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,887
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie Parker
OOOOOOO, proof, proof proof!!!  |
YOU ARE A TRUE IDIOT ARENT YOU? YOU NEED PROOF THAT SADDAM VIOLATED THE 1991 CASE FIRE AGREEMENT? WHY? IT HAS ALLREADY BEEN PROVEN BY 3 ADMINISTRATIONS!
Quote:
Mark Goldblatt on Iraq on National Review Online
Saddam was left free to violate the terms of the cease-fire agreement which kept him in power after the 1991 Gulf War—violations which included kicking out United Nations weapons inspectors and firing on American aircraft patrolling no-fly zones.
Saddam stood in defiance of 17 subsequent U.N. Security Council resolutions insisting that he come into compliance with the terms of the 1991 agreement or face serious consequences—thus making a mockery of the Security Council and the entire U.N.
|
Quote:
Mark Goldblatt on Iraq on National Review Online
That question, of course, returns us to the cease-fire agreement of 1991, the one Saddam signed after coalition forces, led by the United States, chased his army out of Kuwait. The cease-fire agreement permitted Saddam to remain in power on the condition that Iraq provide full and accurate disclosure of all long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq allow U.N. inspectors unobstructed access to weapons facilities to verify Iraq's disarmament, and that Iraq
That question, of course, returns us to the cease-fire agreement of 1991, the one Saddam signed after coalition forces, led by the United States, chased his army out of Kuwait. The cease-fire agreement permitted Saddam to remain in power on the condition that Iraq provide full and accurate disclosure of all long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq allow U.N. inspectors unobstructed access to weapons facilities to verify Iraq's disarmament, and that Iraq
No sentient human being believes Saddam ever complied with the cease-fire agreement of 1991, which is why there were 17 unanimous Security Council resolutions demanding that he come into compliance. When the U.N. wouldn’t authorize the use of force, the United States invoked its right, as leader of the 1991 coalition—and thus the principal aggrieved contracting party to the cease fire—to resume hostilities with Saddam’s regime and remove him from power.
This is a critical point—and, again, a perpetual blind spot for critics of the war. The U.S. did not oust Saddam only because we thought he had, or was developing, WMD. Rather, the U.S. ousted Saddam because we thought he had, or was developing, WMD, which, along with other violations, put him in breach of the 1991 cease-fire agreement. Critics of the war, including Democratic-party hacks and Hollywood mouth-breathers, continually omit that last clause. That omission lies behind their smirks as they inquire: “Well, if we’re going to topple Saddam because he’s a bad guy, why don’t we go after all the other bad guys?”
Answer: Because the other bad guys aren’t in breach of a cease-fire agreement.
|
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem." Ronald Reagan
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Smitty0311; 11-16-2007 at 10:01 AM.
|
11-16-2007, 06:18 PM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,524
|
|
National Review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
National Review (NR) is a biweekly magazine of political opinion, founded by author William F. Buckley, Jr. in 1955 and based in New York City. .. Generally the magazine provides conservative views and analysis on the world's current events....
Hey, Smitty why do you think William F. Buckley, the father of the Conservative movement declared the war over, almost 2 years ago?
In Feb of 2006 William F. Buckley, Jr declared that the War in Iraq was a failure.
William F. Buckley Jr. on National Review Online
It Didn't Work
By William F. Buckley Jr.
...Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols. ...
He also wished he had advised against the war. Too bad we have to wait years for Conservatives to admit the obvious.
William F. Buckley Jr. on National Review Online
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
