Jump to content

Change Mode

The Iraqi Elections


Recommended Posts

doc,

 

You keep richoting between the weakness of the media, the general public and American and international law, pitting one against the other.

 

So let's keep it simple and just answer me this: Is America in a legal state of war as defined by the American constitution (not the UN, not the media, not the great unwashed and not the administration)? The only legitimate answer is either yes or no: One syllable, no justification.

 

I

Edited by Iain
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 500
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tell me what "severest consequences" means? Then tell me where the chemical agents are. The UN lost track of them. They were absolutely there. It isn't that they didn't find them. They lost them, years ago.

'Severest consequences' means military action endorsed by the Security Council. No such Resolution was tabled and France threatened to veto it if it was.

I don't know where the chemical agents are but the Chemical Brothers are on tour. :lol:

Edited by moon
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe how much worth people put into the media at times, it's astounding.

What else do you got for information? The government? :lol::rolleyes: Governments only give the straight goods eh? They would never try and cover up scandles ;)

 

At least with media their are left and right wing media outlets and somewhere in the whole cluster:filtered: is the truth. The government tells you what you want to hear!

Link to post
Share on other sites

doc,

 

You keep richoting between the weakness of the media, the general public and American and international law, pitting one against the other.

 

So let's keep it simple and just answer me this: Is America in a legal state of war as defined by the American constitution (not the UN, not the media, not the great unwashed and not the administration)? The only legitimate answer is either yes or no: One syllable, no justification.

 

I

:P

 

I would be very interested to hear the Answer to the Question you Posed, Iain!

 

It is a very Fair Question, which strips away all the two and Froing, makes it quite Simple? Either there is a Legal War, or there is Not!

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats not really true because of two reasons

 

1. Its legal due to the failure of Iraq to meet its cease fire obligations that it signed with the US and other participating members of Gulf War 1

 

2. Its legality under the US constitution can be argued due to the length of time of US troop deployments. Due to the lack of a true declaration of war, and the fact that US troops are going to be deployed for multiple years this is in essence unconstitutional even though congress did in fact approve the altercation and the president went through proper channels to gain approval to start a military conflict.

Edited by one2gamble
Link to post
Share on other sites

it's even easier than that....it it looks like a duck, walks like a duck n' sounds like a duck....it ain't an elephant....it's a duck, duck being war :P

 

besides that, that news articles discussing bush's request for 80 billion was stated to be for the purpose of the war in Iraq.

 

with an all time deficent n' social security being ripped apart, among other things....there's gonna be a war if there isn't already :mrgreen:

Link to post
Share on other sites

doc,

 

You keep richoting between the weakness of the media, the general public and American and international law, pitting one against the other.

 

So let's keep it simple and just answer me this: Is America in a legal state of war as defined by the American constitution (not the UN, not the media, not the great unwashed and not the administration)? The only legitimate answer is either yes or no: One syllable, no justification.

 

I

No, the war is formally over.

 

As for the former war, yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here ya go, 'doc. ;

Tony Blair yesterday refused to release the full advice he received on the legality of the invasion of Iraq, in what is seen as a key test of the government's commitment to freedom of information.

 

The prime minister rejected more than 40 requests for the information from MPs, other individuals and media organisations, including the Guardian.

 

He is now heading for a confrontation with the information commissioner. The advice is seen as an important test for the openness act, as it is widely believed that the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, failed to provide a proper justification for the invasion.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/freedom/Story/0,...1398508,00.html
Link to post
Share on other sites

the president went through proper channels to gain approval to start a military conflict.

Not true, in my opinion. The president bullied congress into approving extraordinary deployments in Iraq which lay outside of both their constitutional mandates: Bullying designed to give American voters a hard-on in light of the military and political failures they've suffered over the past thirty years, real or perceived.

 

I

Link to post
Share on other sites

:P

 

The really, really thing, under Law? Did the US and the Allies INVADE Legally???

 

If they diddn't? Watch out for the Damages BILL, could be worth $TRILLIONS!!!!

 

Interesting Point about this, Particularly considering you can be sued, just simply if your Kid does something so silly!

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

:P

 

What an interesting Point?

 

What would Happen, just if? Iraq was Invaded Illegally?

 

Someone want to research it?

 

What a strange thing?

 

Here is one to start it off!

 

http://www.truthinaction.net/iraq/illegaljayne.htm

 

BTW I diddn't write that!

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Edited by Drovers Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true, in my opinion. The president bullied congress into approving extraordinary deployments in Iraq which lay outside of both their constitutional mandates: Bullying designed to give American voters a hard-on in light of the military and political failures they've suffered over the past thirty years, real or perceived.

 

I

did congress approve the deployment or not?

 

 

bills have been bullied through congress every year since the congressional first term, its not a valid argument.

Edited by one2gamble
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...