Here we go.

Imagine how pissed you would be if some country invaded the US, set up a checkpoint, and used it as an excuse to blow away a minivan full of women and children in Indiana.
Click to expand...

You act like they did this on purpose flav. You have no fucking clue what happened. You weren't there. You weren't in their shoes. Unless you know for sure of what happened, don't start throwing accusations of murder around.
 
We are if they fucking listen. The soldiers waved them to stop, shot over their head, shot intot he radiator, how many fucking warning should we give them, freako?
 
I was under the impression we had. Congress overwhelmingly approved it.
 
PostCode said:
You act like they did this on purpose flav. You have no fucking clue what happened. You weren't there. You weren't in their shoes. Unless you know for sure of what happened, don't start throwing accusations of murder around.
Click to expand...

Were you able to read my post explaining the point or did you decide to skip that so you would have a chance to rant?
 
PuterTutor said:
We are if they fucking listen. The soldiers waved them to stop, shot over their head, shot intot he radiator, how many fucking warning should we give them, freako?
Click to expand...



shooting at them as a warning??? that could kill someone if you misfire. besides that we are forcing ourselves on them. some have been happy to see us actually most have from what i heard but setting up the stops puts some at risk from attacks while protecting others. flav war was declared a while back.
 
flavio said:
Postcode knows what I'm talking about
Click to expand...
Ok, Posty, here's you chance to let us in on Flavs mind. What the fuck is he talking about?
 
freako104 said:
shooting at them as a warning??? that could kill someone if you misfire.
Click to expand...

Yes it sure could, freako. And they could kill you if they don't stop too.
 
Declaration of War with Iraq:

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The president is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the president shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the president pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the

War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. Nothing in this resolution

supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry, flav, I would be pissed. Like most of the Iraqi non-combatants though, I would know who to be pissed at.
 
Comparing what's hapenning in Iraq to the potential of the same in America is apples & oranges.

Clarify-IF we lived under a tyranical dictatorship & a liberating force came in, then you could compare. That's not he case...until it is, we can only play guessing games.

What happened to the vans occupants is tragic. The force used was justified-if the press is correct.
 
I'm asking if you would be pissed if it happened to a minivan full of women and children in the US.
Click to expand...
Sure I would. I can't see American military people putting the civilian population at risk that way though, can you?
 
You, flav, are indirectly accusing those soldiers of murder.

used it as an excuse to blow away a minivan full of women and children
Click to expand...

They weren't shot as a warning. The soldiers shot into the air. After that, they shot the radiator. The vehicle continued on, so at this point they had little choice.
 
PostCode said:
You, flav, are indirectly accusing those soldiers of murder.

used it as an excuse to blow away a minivan full of women and children
Click to expand...

They weren't shot as a warning. The soldiers shot into the air. After that, they shot the radiator. The vehicle continued on, so at this point they had little choice.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. As I said twice in this thread already....you can't condemn them. I don't understand how you're still confused.
 
its a sad thing that happened but you can appreciate the position of both sides. there was some specualtion that no warning shots were fired on teh bbc but i don't think it makes a whole load of difference either way.
if it happened here i'd be pissed off, i expect the iraqi's and us soldiers are pissed off that they did it as well - no one wants this kind of thing to happen.

the headline will nearly always read 'soldiers kill women and children', right or left wing papers here will probably run it close to the same because it will sell papers. vans are expendable in war, sadly civilians especially women and kiddies, aren't
 
I think that was in MSNBC's version too. I have to wonder about that though. How soon is soon enough? Do you start firing warning shots when they're a quarter mile down the road? 500 feet? 200 feet? A car going 30 mph will close a distance of 200 feet in about 4 and a half seconds. So when do you fire that warning shot?

I think that Captain immediatly wanted to put the blame off on someone else, and that's why he said what he did.
 
Even with that. Those things were supposed to happen. You can expect unjust losses in any war. Stupid politicians are to blame, not soldiers in this case...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top