Powerful war related images thread

[Ripsnort]

[StSanta]

Toad, if your reasons were used by the US government, the US would have been all over Africa by now. And Latin America, and...well, the US would be fighting on every continent except possibly Australia.

It's BS to say the US does this solely for altruistic reasons. It might be part of the reason, but it isn't the important bit. If it was so important, why wasn't something done in Rwanda? Why not in other places today?

Freedom argument is well and dandy, but reality check please. It is secondary to other concerns and the world as it is today proves that. I hope I do not need to show this, but I can.

[Frogm4n]

my reasons for being skeptical about this latest war is the hypocricies involved. we are doing it to fight terrorism, then why didnt we invade the saudis first. we are doing it to liberate a people, then why not liberate the North Koreans first. We are doing it to stop the spread of WMD. Irans nuclear program is going full steam , and i doubt we will say a word about that. We are doing this because of UN violations. Isreal?It is a damn good thing that saddam is gone, but alot of us belived if bush didnt piss off the europeons with the kyoto accord and abm treaty we would have gotten alot more support.(support isnt no being against the war, but helping unlike 95 percent of this "coalition") It also appeard quite obvious that we were going to go to war no matter what happened diplomaticly so that pissed off alot of people. Its like playing cards and everyone knowing your moves by your expresion.

[Frogm4n]

oh and here is my picture, the allied assult upon mecha hitler:

[Toad]

I'm not sure I see what you are referring to Santa.

I don't think I did say this was for altruistic reasons; I said it was because SH ignored the terms of the '91 ceasefire and danced around 17 UN SC resolutions for 12 years.

I said the "liberation" aspect is a bonus for Iraqis.

I also said there is no way the UN will ever intervene in Africa and the US won't either. IMO, we'd be excoriated to an even greater degree for that than this. Remember when we went to Somalia AT UN REQUEST? Excoriated for that as well.

Reality check for you:

There can be very few if any sentient beings left in the industrialized world that are unaware of the slaughter going on RIGHT NOW in several parts of Africa.

Why hasn't the UN or the UN SC taken action? Eh? Can't hear you?

Why focus on why the US doesn't save the world when we're forever being chastised for trying to save the world?

Where's the bloody UN resolutions on the various slaughters going on around the world? Eh? Can't hear you?

You know as well as I the UN failed to act during the Kosovo slaughter and it took Clinton to lead the NATO countries in a violation of the NATO Charter to stop that slaughter.

So why do slaughters go on? What's that again? Eh?

[Animal]

Thanks for derailing the thread.

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by StSanta
and...well, the US would be fighting on every continent except possibly Australia.

Thats because We'd kick the US's arse!

Especially led by the Explosive suicide croc division!



 Tronsky

[GRUNHERZ]

Its funny how the anti-war side suggests that we should really attack every country in the world except the one that we are actually dealing with instead of contemplating along with them over a cup of latte about how much better the world could be if there were no problems and no bad governments....

[Sandman]

[Sandman]