Why is USA in Iraq?

[Jesus My Wisdom]

And they were allowed to leave when?

You said two days later...

All diplomats?

[quote:959fa]USA appointed itself as the nation to take care of Hussein for the good of the world. How many times as Bush said that?

That doesn't equate itself to "policing." The bottomline is that the US's actions were for the US, but it happens that it was for the bettering of the world.[/quote:959fa]

And USA was threatened how?

[quote:959fa]That is a UN decision. And they were already looking for the WMD's. When did USA gain the right to act for the world? This right here is evidence of the self-appointing attitude.

There are no rights outside of countries, only inside of countries. The USA has the ability to do whatever is in its best interest and the president of the United States is given the direct responsiblity of defending the security of the nation... the US, and every other country, will act in its best interests or be harmed. That USA has shown that it will not be controlled by third-parties, it's unfortuante if you don't like that.
[/quote:959fa]

Then why were you arguing the international law UN party line when it suits you and against it when it does not?

"If you are defeated in war and you agree to certain post-war resolutions, then you are required to meet those resolutions or meet penalties. Ten years of sanctions didn't work, ten years of diplomacy didn't work, so yes, after ten years of penalties, military action was necessary to assertain whether or not WMDs existed inside the country. "

Shall the US invade any country it likes to do some ascertaining?

[quote:959fa]Who cares what Hussein had 11 years prior? What matters is what he had in 2003.

That's not necessarily true. However, we didn't know what he had because he wouldn't tell us... we had to find out, and that determination is not final. Although in your mind you seem to have made your opinion final.[/quote:959fa]

The UN Inspectors were already looking before the invasion. "He wouldn't tell us?" How can he tell you when they are not there?

[quote:959fa]I see, so now NUKEs are not part of the WMD problem? Its just those lesser WMD's we gotta deal with right?

Nukes are WMDs, Iraq never had nukes, all WMDs are intrinsically dangerous by their very nature.
[/quote:959fa]

And so why not invade NK then? And swing by Pakistan on the way.

[quote:959fa]USA had clear reason to go into Afghanistan. The men who attacked New York were stationed there.

Actually, they were dead.
[/quote:959fa]

Funny. Then you had no reason to go there right?

[quote:959fa]You still have shown no grounds for the invasion of Iraq.

Sure I have, but you're not going to accept anything. So, it's looking like I have little reason to "debate."
[/quote:959fa]

All you have shown is speculation. NOTHING else.

JMW

 

[Blue-Lightning]

All diplomats?

I don't understand the question... it's not a complete sentence. No sarcasm included.

Then why were you arguing the international law UN party line when it suits you and against it when it does not?

I'm not. The UN gave Iraq certain resolution to abide by, they didn't, key players in the UN chose to oppose action against Iraq for the broken resolutions, and the US decided to go it alone if it had to. The USA can do that, and it did.

Shall the US invade any country it likes to do some ascertaining?

It could, but we choose not to.

How can he tell you when they are not there?

We asked for proof that they were not there, as was required by the resolutions, and he refused to give us any. Most knowledgable people on the subject believe that he thought he had WMDs.

And so why not invade NK then? And swing by Pakistan on the way.

I don't want to invade NK because I don't want our military overstretched - I'd rather just bomb their insane leader. Pakistan has been an ally as of late and have not shown a willingness to use their weapons without need.

Funny. Then you had no reason to go there right?

Just showing you how silly your position is. No, the people who attacked us weren't in Afghanistan, yes you think it was okay to go there. No, Saddam Hussein didn't attack us, but for some reason you feel that it wasn't okay to attack him.

All you have shown is speculation. NOTHING else.

Objectively I have shown that Saddam Hussein repeatedly broke UN resolutions and they had a penalty attatched to them. The US acted in its best interest although key members of the UN chose not to follow through.

BL[/quote]

 

[Bryan]

This is frightening.

JMW is the only person in this debate who has any clue what he's talking about.

Are you people serious that before this was brought up in this thread that you didn't already know that the Bush and Bin Laden families were business partners? Seriously?

 

[Fish-Cross]

This is frightening.

JMW is the only person in this debate who has any clue what he's talking about.

Are you people serious that before this was brought up in this thread that you didn't already know that the Bush and Bin Laden families were business partners? Seriously?

WOW! Where do you get your "opinion"?

 

[Bryan]

It's not an opinion, it's a well known fact.

They're called books Fish-Cross, you really should look into them.

 

[Fish-Cross]

It's not an opinion, it's a well known fact.

They're called books Fish-Cross, you really should look into them.

What type of books? Democrat and Liberal books?

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

It's not an opinion, it's a well known fact.

They're called books Fish-Cross, you really should look into them.

What type of books? Democrat and Liberal books?

No, I wouldn't recommend partisan books like Democrat or Republican ones. Try the ones with the truth in them. People with common sense can usually figure out which ones they are.

JMW

 

[Fish-Cross]

[quote="Fish-Cross":80f1b]

It's not an opinion, it's a well known fact.

They're called books Fish-Cross, you really should look into them.

What type of books? Democrat and Liberal books?

No, I wouldn't recommend partisan books like Democrat or Republican ones. Try the ones with the truth in them. People with common sense can usually figure out which ones they are.

JMW[/quote:80f1b]I'm sure you wouldn't be able to find them then. :-?

 

[creed10369]

if president bush and his administration convinced congress to go to war then i guess he either told what they thought was there or pulled a really slick trick on them :wink:

 

[Blue-Lightning]

False ad hominem.

BL

 

[Bryan]

It's not an opinion, it's a well known fact.

They're called books Fish-Cross, you really should look into them.

What type of books? Democrat and Liberal books?

You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

 

[Blue-Lightning]

Bryan, for all the times that you ask if other people have a clue, you've proven time and time to me that you have not a clue.

BL

 

[Vic C.]

if president bush and his administration convinced congress to go to war then i guess he either told what they thought was there or pulled a really slick trick on them :wink:

Hey there...where have you been for hte last 10-11 months? 8)

 

[Bryan]

Bryan, for all the times that you ask if other people have a clue, you've proven time and time to me that you have not a clue.

BL

You've got to be kidding? All I said was it is an established fact that the Bushes and the Bin Ladens have been business partners going back a long time. Are you seriously trying to dispute this?

 

[Fish-Cross]

Bryan, for all the times that you ask if other people have a clue, you've proven time and time to me that you have not a clue.

BL

You've got to be kidding? All I said was it is an established fact that the Bushes and the Bin Ladens have been business partners going back a long time. Are you seriously trying to dispute this?

I am!

 

[Blue-Lightning]

Either way... the only bin Laden that I have a problem with Osama bin Hiden.

BL

 

[Fish-Cross]

Either way... the only bin Laden that I have a problem with Osama bin Hiden.

BL

Yes, I agree. Good point.

 

[antitox]

And your point is?

JMW

Since you are in agreement with those who are against the Bush administration's position on Iraq, -showing you where they stood just before we went in shows reason and support for what we did.
It's ironic though, that they changed their tune and are saying what you are saying now.

 

[Bryan]

Either way... the only bin Laden that I have a problem with Osama bin Hiden.

BL

Really? Even though his family in Saudi Arabia continued to funnel money TO Osama in Afghanistan in order to fund his attacks against the U.S? Even though the current President's father, former President George H.W. Bush was having a breakfast meeting with Osama's brother the morning of the 9/11 attacks?

You have no problem with that?

 

[Fish-Cross]

I hope that the people on here who are complaining, actually vote when it is election time. I know I don't but I plan to when I can. The way I feel is if you do not vote, unless for some reason you are unable to, you have no right to complain about the government.