Author Topic: what do you expecting to change ? (Read 1233 times)

Tumor · « **Reply #45 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:30:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eaglecz

any other stupid comments ?

Pretty sure the opening to this thread takes the stupid comment award.

Eaglecz · « **Reply #46 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:32:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
It is a fact that Iraq has aided terrorists.
It is a fact that they have had WMD.
It is a fact that they have failed to be truthful in conforming to 687.
It is a fact that WMD make a nation more dangerous.

I feel there are enough facts to warrent the US taking action.

1. not Iraq but SH
2. they had... if they hold them or not wasnt proved
3. 687 doesnt speek about vulching Iraq
4. is US(Israel) finaly about to disarm as well ?

5. i simply do not think, and those facts arent enought to say UN diddly off

Martlet · « **Reply #47 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:47:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eaglecz
1. not Iraq but SH
2. they had... if they hold them or not wasnt proved
3. 687 doesnt speek about vulching Iraq
4. is US(Israel) finaly about to disarm as well ?

5. i simply do not think, and those facts arent enought to say UN diddly off

1. correct. That is what I meant. My apologies.
2. Again, correct. However, it has been shown he declared to have no weapons in violation of 687, yet some were found.
3. Correct, it is a resolution on Iraq, not on other countries. It doesn't say you can't vulch Iraq, either. It says they will be granted a cease fire as long as they adhere to the resolution.
4. The US doesn't have a resolution requiring them to disarm. I can't speak for Israel, and won't research it since it isn't pertinent to this discussion.
5. The UN wasn't told to diddly off.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #48 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:52:16 PM »

Eagle you ignorant slut.

Stopt trying to make exuse for iraq having WMD on account that the USA does.

You shouldnt be such an ignorant diddly.

Eaglecz · « **Reply #49 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:55:48 PM »

nice post Martlet

well Grunhertz.... bla bla bla ... what a post

rc51 · « **Reply #50 on:** March 18, 2003, 04:56:17 PM »

sadumbs shorts

Rasker · « **Reply #51 on:** March 18, 2003, 05:09:02 PM »

chant: "Violence Solves Nothing"

counter-chant: "Violence Solved Hitler"

Eaglecz · « **Reply #52 on:** March 19, 2003, 01:48:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rasker

counter-chant: "Violence Solved Hitler"

but Hitler taken Austria, France, Czech, Poland etc....

SH didnt take nothing, so this analogy is a bit off

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #53 on:** March 19, 2003, 02:08:40 AM »

So you are saying we cannot act until he does something really bad? You are saying that we cannot act until after he blows up new york or tel aviv?

That is like saying we should not have acted against the 911 terrorists until after they destroyed the WTC abd killed 3,000 americans.

Come to think of it that is, exactly, like saying nobody should have acted against Hitler until, and only until after he conquered: Austria, Chezkoslovakia and Poland.

How can you,supposedly a czech be so willing and welcoming of appeasement - the very same process by which cowardly euro leaders gave your homeland to adolf hitler of all people. How is this possible?

How can you be so short-sighted, so stupid?

Eaglecz · « **Reply #54 on:** March 19, 2003, 02:15:58 AM »

1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.

No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.

you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol

Eaglecz · « **Reply #55 on:** March 19, 2003, 02:18:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Come to think of it that is, exactly, like saying nobody should have acted against Hitler until, and only until after he conquered: Austria, Chezkoslovakia and Poland.

actualy and who did something agains that ????

edit.: ofcourse it was problem of German people until hitler took Austria, since that moment it become international problem

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #56 on:** March 19, 2003, 03:03:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.

No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.

you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol

Yea lets just ask him to leave without posing 250,000 troops and a threat of invasion within 48 hours. Or maybe we can pass a few more UN resolutions. Or better yet why not pass sanctions to cripple his regime.

How would you remove saddam hussesin without force?

Yes we do have the right to attack him, they are in vioation of the 1991 cease fire which called for him to disarm under threat of resumed mitary action.

As for Hitler.

He was in open violation of counteless rules of verailles treaty. In 1936 he remiliterized the rheinland in open defiance of the international community. They, the french, did nothing.

Are so madly oppsed to the USA policy that you excuse and justify the appeasement betrayal and conquest of your own country in 1938 order to argue against american policy today?

How can you be so blazingly foolish? Dont you realize how pathetic and esperate to bash the US policy this attitued makes you look?

Martlet · « **Reply #57 on:** March 19, 2003, 03:08:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.

No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.

you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol

Saddam doesn't attack Israel, but he pays people to do it.

That's good enough for me.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #58 on:** March 19, 2003, 03:09:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.

No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.

Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.

Kuwait; Aug 1990, Tel Aviv; Winter 1991 were attacked by Iraq, and since the end of Gulf War hostilities then were contingent upon Iraq's behavior, so the case can be made that the 'right' to attack exists.

The agreement signed by representatives of Iraq provides for a complete accounting and a schedule for Iraq to cooperate and disarm to agreed upon levels. That time expired long ago.

Quote

you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol [/B]

When remodeling a house, often the first step is at least a partial demolition.

In order to rebuild Japan, the Tojo government needed to be unseated, then modern democracy was 'forced' upon them by outside, conquering forces, and the enlightened leadership of the US Army, personified by Douglas MacArthur.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #59 on:** March 19, 2003, 03:43:12 AM »

EagleCZ I must admit I am shocked by your naive ignorance...