Hmmmm
Well anyway, so far no link has been established between Sadam and terrorist organisations, or him and 9/11, so lets not try justifying anything on that basis hmmm.
As far as the UN goes, the US administration had decided they weren't seriously going to try and involve the UN anyway, got persuaded by other countries to give the UN a go, but, well, is it a big surprise that given their lack of enthusiasm the US case didn't get UN backing hmm?
But anyway, back to the issue at hand.
First...umm, formal hostilities ended way back, so 'war' is actually not the right term (Someone who is well informed put me right if I'm wrong!). But that aside, the debate on the 'status' of the 'terrorist' side in terms of GC is fairly laughable. The 'hostile' people that have been fighting in Iraq can not just be labled 'terrorists', there look to be many groups as well as I am sure people who are not organsied in any noticable way. External (non Iraqi) Jihad types, Iraqi jihad types, Iraqi's who are fighting what they see as an invading army, and on that count, if you consider it from thier (probably fairly uninformed point of view, or just a very strong nationalist/defend my country mindset), which I would think many on these boards would understand if the situation was put into context of an invasion (however right or wrong) of their own country, and probably Iraqi's who are not going to move out of their homes just cos someone, anyone tells them to, and are going to shoot the first person of any type that comes at them.
Both of the last two types would not be recognised by the current rules of war as genuine combatants, but from a moral stand are very much in the 'right' to defend their country/homes even against an 'imposed' government. How ca you tell these latter 'Home defenders' from Jihaders or terrorists....you can't. My point....don't just lump all hostiles into one easy to describe and hate group called 'terrorists'.
Despite all of the above, in a combat zone where there has been a known pattern of the enemy using 'dirty tricks' (and when it comes to streetfighting you've got to ba a little dipsy in the head to not use any tactic that works), shooting first and asking questions a looong way second is only common sense. It may not be nice, or sporting, or moral, or following strict ROE, or the normal rules of war, but self preservation overides, thankfully all of the above. The marine's true crime....being filmed doing it. That modern wars arenot so tightly bound with the media is a whole other debate, and not a pretty one.
Anyway, there is my two pence worth for now, oh, and please stop the 'tards thing, it just shows that the person using has no respect for others, and if you really have no respect for others, well, lets not go there shall we!
