Wasn't Saddam ousted for doing precisely this sort of thing?

by Simon 398 Replies latest social current

• 

  blacksheep

  Of course, the lawyers of the key solider who allegedly committed the crimes, who at 37 and with experience in maintaining prisoners, will have you believe this. Sure he's going to attempt to be absolved of any blame.

  Well, it's convenient if they were all acting alone but this still reflects as badly on the chain of command - they are untrained and undisciplined and unsupervised. What are we paying the commanders for exactly if they actually do sod all?

  So now we go from the apparent abuse scandal of the century, which must involve the entire US Army, Rumsfeld and Bush himself, and which is so serious that the perpetrators should be shot by a firing squad...down to undiscplined/unsupervised/poorly trained soldiers?

  Yes, this "lack of supervison" scandal must go all the way to the top! LOL.
• 

  got my forty homey?

  Wasnt it wierd to see a woman standing there on top of these naked men laughing? I guess this gives the women's lib movement some positive energy as to women being able to fight in the field.

  And lets look at the bottom line, Muslims were mad at us anyway, I mean to try to destroy the World Trade Center in 1993 and then do it again succesfully in 2001 how much more angry can we make them? Were they in a good mood in Sept 2001 and now they REALLY are angry with us?

  Hey the more american deaths the better chance Kerry wins, the spainards already folded like cheap camera's.
• 

  Realist

  fourty,

  spain withdrew its troops not because of the terror attack but because of the view of now ruling party that the whole iraq war was illegal to say the least.

  the new government had promised spain to withdrew the troops if they get elected - and thats exactly what they did. with or without the terror.
• 

  blacksheep

  spain withdrew its troops not because of the terror attack but because of the view of now ruling party that the whole iraq war was illegal to say the least.

  the new government had promised spain to withdrew the troops if they get elected - and thats exactly what they did. with or without the terror.

  That's the biggest bunch of BS I've heard. Right. Had NOTHING to do with the bombing in Madrid just days before the election?

  You really are delusional.
• 

  got my forty homey?

  I'll tell you what, if I was a Muslim man and it was degrading for a white woman to see me naked I would think twice about attacking the US again or even being involved with Muslims who would want to attack the US again.

  It reminds me of US Navy men who would wear Japenese Kamikazi pilots who they shot down bones around thier necks as souverniers. Its sick, but thats why its called war. Wars bring the worst out of people and the US cannot fight a polictical correct war or we are gonna lose badly.
• 

  Yerusalyim

  To you, Israel can kill and maim without a whiff of criticism whereas the reality is that BOTH sides commit terrorist acts.

  Simon,
  

  When Israelis begin attacking civilians on purpose, shooting women and children at close range...let me know...I'll protest it LOUDLY! (And you have the nerve to accuse ME of massive blind spots?)
  
  UnRealist

  fourty,

  spain withdrew its troops not because of the terror attack but because of the view of now ruling party that the whole iraq war was illegal to say the least.

  the new government had promised spain to withdrew the troops if they get elected - and thats exactly what they did. with or without the terror.

  The party would not have won the election had it not been for the bombing...Geesh
• 

  Yerusalyim

  i suppose an israeli helicopter fireing on civilian targets or the israeli army destroying homes and farmland is of course an act of justified revenge in your universe. so was the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the two atom bomb droppings!

  Oh Cheese and Crackers Realist...when have the Israelis targeted civilians? Surely you're not talking abou the two dead Hamas leaders...are you? Do they get hurt, sure, blame that on the terrorists for hiding among civilains. They destroy the homes of the terrorists that kill civilians as a form of retribution...if you've read my posts on this board...I disagree with the policy...but, they don't bulldoze civilians in those houses. If only the Palis wouldn't kill civilians, huh.

  As sorry as I am about it the dropping of the A bomb saved lives. Then again, I wasn't alive then, nor were you.
• 

  Realist

  black,

  the reason why i find it pointless to discuss issues with you is that you don'T know crucial facts. and you are not willing to learn.

  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3640077.stm

  Opinion polls before the Iraq war began showed more than 90% of Spaniards opposed the troops' deployment.

  Since the US champions democracy, Mr Moratinos (new foreign minister) says, it will understand that the Spanish government must honour its pre-election pledge on Iraq.

  Mr Zapatero, who won Spain's general election three days after the multiple Madrid train bombings, has been accused of trying to fend off further attacks by leaving Iraq.

  But Mr Zapatero reminds critics that the pledge on Iraq was a pre-election promise, made long before the bombings.

  i love it how Moratinos put it! the guy surely knows how to play with these bullshit phrases!

  and if you don't trust BBC make a simple google search - if you know how to do that!

  yeru,

  a) i did not claim that the socialists would have won without the bombings.

  b) to proof which side would have won without the attacks is an impossibility. after all aznar was very unpolular especially because of the iraq issue. so give it a rest.
• 

  Realist

  yeru,

  israel has many times hit civilian targets with the excuse they wanted to hit some terrorist. for the victims the outcome is the same regardless of the claimed intention.

  also to shoot at children who throw stones is a gross violation of self defense. it is murder and you know that.

  about the A bombings: most people agree that japan was ready to surrender anyway. their only demand was that the emperor would not be put on trial since he was viewed as godlike.

  but even in case this is not true there still remains the problem of EXPLAINING THE SECOND BOMB!

  how do you explain nagasaki?
• 

  blacksheep

  the reason why i find it pointless to discuss issues with you is that you don'T know crucial facts. and you are not willing to learn.

  You consistently confuse "facts" with your biased opinion.