Chopper shot down

but the fact still remains that the decision to take a life is not up to some big shots in Washington. There is always another way. war is bad. and this is horrible. but there is another way and i leave it up to the nerds of the USA to find out how. They always have the best ideas. at least the ones at my school. Were so smart.:drink2::nono:
 
NERVETULIPS said:
but the fact still remains that the decision to take a life is not up to some big shots in Washington. There is always another way. war is bad. and this is horrible. but there is another way and i leave it up to the nerds of the USA to find out how. They always have the best ideas. at least the ones at my school. Were so smart.:drink2::nono:
Click to expand...
ever heard Dogs of War by Pink Floyd? :p
 
2lips said:
war is bad. and this is horrible.
Click to expand...

Propose a better solution.

War solved many problems. It stopped a madman from overtaking Europe, It stopped slavery in the U.S. It created the unified republic.

Invading an unsuspecting or otherwise peaceful nation to end its sovereignty or to take it's lands it bad.
 
Squiggy said:
They cap the well after the fire is out, Prof. They could have left them capped and moved on to more serious priorities.
Click to expand...


No they couldn't. The insurgents (as they've been called) would have just come back in behind them and wrecked them again. They had to be guarded 24/7. And if you're gonna spend the manpower to do that, you may as well have them running, no?

And last time I checked, those other problems were being dealt with in turn. But since most of the equipment for the oil plants was fairly new and only sabotaged, it was relatively easy to fix. Some of those water plants had to be rebuilt from the sand up. Many hadn't worked since the first gulf war.

You tell me what's easier to fix. A new car with the engine ripped out, or an old clunker with everything rusted solid?
 
wait till tomorow ill ask my people i.e. a big bunch of super nerds at my school that seem to everything. ill tell you what they come up with. im pretty sure it will be something good. capture and kidnapping are always a good idea for taking out unwanted and unjust world leaders. as for slavery hmmmm.... nerds to the rescue! but then again maybe im just an immpresinable youth who watches toooooooooooooooooooooo much trigun o ya and mirlyn i am just 15 years old but i will get right on ******no posting of warez,or illegally downloading******** hehehehehe:hairbang:

Sam
 
Gonz said:
Who wants Irai oil...not the Republicans said President Bush
Click to expand...

That's just a straight out lie. They do want the oil, and you know it Gonz. As soon as they have infrastructure up and running they'll cut some deal with the government they set up to get the oil, just watch.

War can always be avoided, always. The Hussein regime was a crime against humanity, I'm not dening that. The fact that Saddam is gone is good. But the fact that the American government lied to the rest of the world and started a war on insubstantial evidence despite the UN vetos saying they shouldn't, THAT is bad.
 
Bungi said:
the UN vetos saying they shouldn't,
Click to expand...

No UN veto, no official condemnation, Yes to 14 resolutions & a unified yes to the final resolution.
 
Gonz could you link me to the 14 resolutions, i can only find 11, and none of them says it's OK for the US to invade Iraq under false pretences, or that it was OK to lie repeatedly to the international community.
 
There were no resolutions that gave the U.S the power to invade Iraq. There was one formed and prepared to be submitted but France, Germany, Russia, China, and any other sane country with veto power was prepared to veto. So Bush just invaded without UN support. Atleast that's how I heard it.

And it wouldn't surprise me. Bush didn't submit the elections details to the UN either. Bush skipped a huge environmental meeting in Africa between a large number of nations. Bush pulled out of more treaties than any previous president. Bush continues to 'negotiate' with North Korea without actually listening to what the other parties say.
 
I never said 14 was wrong, I said I could only find 11, thx for the link, now could you tell me where in those resolutions its says 'Iraq's failure to co-operate with UNSCOM will result in the US making up crap and invading under the guise of international security'?
 
We didn't conquer under Iraq using falsifications. The entire world knew he had WMD's & programs to accelerate production & upgrade those weapons. The entire world stood by & said "stop. or we'll say stop again". which is not in the best interest of the UN member countries. We, also, did not conquer Iraq in teh name of international security, specifically. It was more in line with our security. He had ties with terrorists. He allowed them to train on his soil. It was a matter of time before he allowed them to use one of his weapons or gave tehm information on how to create one or more of their own. It was in the interest of our security, which, by proxy, increased the security of the remaining 148 nations of the planet.

Back to the end of April-where are they now? IF, and that's a big IF, he destroyed them, why wasn't there proof, as required by international treaties? It still lies in his court to show absolute proof (or better yet, allow the UN to detry them), which he didn't.
 
Gonz said:
We didn't conquer under Iraq using falsifications. The entire world knew he had WMD's & programs to accelerate production & upgrade those weapons. The entire world stood by & said "stop. or we'll say stop again". which is not in the best interest of the UN member countries. We, also, did not conquer Iraq in teh name of international security, specifically. It was more in line with our security. He had ties with terrorists. He allowed them to train on his soil. It was a matter of time before he allowed them to use one of his weapons or gave tehm information on how to create one or more of their own. It was in the interest of our security, which, by proxy, increased the security of the remaining 148 nations of the planet.

Back to the end of April-where are they now? IF, and that's a big IF, he destroyed them, why wasn't there proof, as required by international treaties? It still lies in his court to show absolute proof (or better yet, allow the UN to detry them), which he didn't.
Click to expand...

Is it the overwhelming preponderance of credible evidence that has convinced you? I feel like the country is more divided than it has been in decades, maybe longer. Perhaps the strategy is to distract the terrorists by giving them what they want.
 
Gonz said:
Back to the end of April-where are they now? IF, and that's a big IF, he destroyed them, why wasn't there proof, as required by international treaties? It still lies in his court to show absolute proof (or better yet, allow the UN to detry them), which he didn't.
Click to expand...

bzzzt...WRONG ANSWER....

When it comes to declaring war, the question SHOULD have been and WAS, "If he HAS the weapons, why isn't there proof?" All we recieved was a lo of innuendo and lies. Bush is a murderer by YOUR standards, Gonz. Give it up.
 
Is it the overwhelming preponderance of credible evidence that has convinced you? I feel like the country is more divided than it has been in decades, maybe longer. Perhaps the strategy is to distract the terrorists by giving them what they want.
Click to expand...

Civil war, baby! I gurantee there's going to be a civil war in atleast 5 years and it's going to devastate the world which depends so heavily on this country.
 
Puma said:
Civil war, baby! I gurantee there's going to be a civil war in atleast 5 years and it's going to devastate the world which depends so heavily on this country.
Click to expand...

Be a bloody short one if there is.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top