He know's you know.

Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"
Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!
Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.


It's funny to me you make wild claims without evidence, then tell 'us' to 'get our facts right'.

(sigh).

I have a feeling the average IQ of the members of this forum dropped 10 points since you joined, little brother.
 
Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"
Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!

Combatants during a war are POWs and are not given trials, there is a fundamental ignorance that laces your post. A gulag was an entirely different animal...


Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.
Now about this WMD point, this shows that even the few speeches that the President gives are missed entirely by yourself or you don't understand english. WMD was only one of the reasons given for the invasion that the Senate voted to give the President Power to bring into being.

We did hear about the 1 million people that demonstrated, if you weren't attempting to make up stuff here you again show a fundamental lack of understanding of the English language. It was reported in the NYT, the LAT, MSNBC, FOXNews, CNN, just google it you can find it. There are simply too many links to provide you with them. Why waste the space on the server when you will fail to understand the language that they were written in?

Listen to more than Randi Rhodes and you might be able to get the idea that your "facts" are opinions and that they are so old as to be nearly indecipherable when compared to the current political climate.
 
Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"

No, just pms.

Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!

Define Gulag, terrorist and POW.

Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.

How long ago was that?? Seriously, hasn't anything happened since then? Inform us oh Genie with the Bright Pink hair.
 
Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"
Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!
Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.

couple of things.....

are there legal prison camps?

how does having a reason prove out false make something illegal?

there are more than a billion people that didn't protest.... no media coverage of that was there?

oh and sand doesn't smell as bad as where you have your head
 
Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"
Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!

Terrorists don't bother to imprison people, they just execute them by beheading. And if they did open a prison, the US would parachute in and wipe them out in minutes.

Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.

Here are some facts, which I think you need to get right.

There were three major reasons for the war against Iraq: 1) Iraq's connection to terrorists and terrorism, 2) Saddam's WMD program, and 3) Saddam's violation of 17 UN resolutions, not to mention violations of the 1991 Gulf War cease-fire. #1 is well documented, but here is a link to refresh your memory if you've forgotten. #2 - every intellengence service in the world, to include the French, thought Saddam had WMDs, a very few of which were found. #3 - there's no question that Saddam didn't care about UN resolutions that were designed to keep him from threatening his neighbors and his own people.

And we did hear that 1,000,000 people worldwide protested the war. We just don't care.
 
Pasquinade said:
Oh dear, are we feeling a little touchy everbody or just suffering from "head in the sand syndrome"
Donald Rumsfeld today said that it was wrong of Amnesty International to compare Gautanemo Bay to a Gulag...ok then precisley what is it? As far as i can see it is an illegal prison camp where supposed combatants are locked up without trial and denied access to basic legal representation, now if it was American prisoners locked up then the US would be screaming about human rights abuse, talk about double standards!!
Ok onto the other point about the illegal war. Both the American and British governments said that the war was about WMD and that Saddam was supporting terrorists...wrong on both counts I do believe. Also if the American media was not so biased you would have heard that over 1 million people demonstrated against the war and plenty more were very vocal about their opposition.
Get your facts right, please.


First off you need to post some facts to support your bullshit! :link: Because all I'm reading is your opinion, and quite frankly I don't think anybody on this board except maybe a couple but I won't mention any names, really gives a f@ck what your opinion is!

Second why don't you go stick your head back in the sand, because obviously you just don't get it! :bye1:
 
Dear Sir Evil,
Point 1. How do we know that these people are terrorists? They haven't been charged with anything, the British "terrorist" suspects that had been in Guantanemo Bay were released, sent back to the UK and not charged with anything at all and they were alleged terrorists according to the US!
Point 2. After all the talk about WMD's, Colin Powell's impassioned speech to the UN and much searching nothing was found, not a single thing. It was also banded around that Saddam was supporting terrorists which was not proved and has in fact been discounted by both US and International Intelligence agencies, can I respecfully draw your attention to the fact that the US Government actively supported known terrorists ie: The Contra's in South America, so that's a case of double standards then? Also one final point, I have served in both the US and British military and the "kick ass" mentality that permeates through the US military is to be quite honest ineffective in dealing with combat situations, one only has to look at how many British casualties so far and how many American, quite a difference I believe. We have had many years of dealing with terrorists (The IRA) and our experience shows in the way that we deal with indiginous people to win hearts and minds, not kick ass and take names.
 
Pasquinade said:
We have had many years of dealing with terrorists (The IRA) and our experience shows in the way that we deal with indiginous people to win hearts and minds, not kick ass and take names.

We are doing both in Iraq and Afghanistan right now, and it's working out great.
 
Pasquinade said:
Dear Sir Evil,
Point 1. How do we know that these people are terrorists? They haven't been charged with anything, the British "terrorist" suspects that had been in Guantanemo Bay were released, sent back to the UK and not charged with anything at all and they were alleged terrorists according to the US!

So, let me see, when we cannot prove they are terrorists they are sent home, those that are POWs are kept, unless they are deemed not dangerous and those too are sent home (so that they can appear on TV and spread hearsay, like the whole Koran story... the original "witness" that reported it now says he NEVER SAW SUCH A THING, only heard it), after all of that, the Red Cross has kept close watch over how we treat the POWs, and the only report we find is that a book was mistreated....

Yet, you actually are attempting to say that we are holding people that we shouldn't. They are POWs, they get released when the war is over or when they are deemed as no longer dangerous to the war effort. That is what a POW is, you take a combatant prisoner and keep them out of the war until it is over or there is a prisoner exchange. It is even "legal" per treaties signed long ago.

Point 2. After all the talk about WMD's, Colin Powell's impassioned speech to the UN and much searching nothing was found, not a single thing. It was also banded around that Saddam was supporting terrorists which was not proved and has in fact been discounted by both US and International Intelligence agencies, can I respecfully draw your attention to the fact that the US Government actively supported known terrorists ie: The Contra's in South America, so that's a case of double standards then? Also one final point, I have served in both the US and British military and the "kick ass" mentality that permeates through the US military is to be quite honest ineffective in dealing with combat situations, one only has to look at how many British casualties so far and how many American, quite a difference I believe. We have had many years of dealing with terrorists (The IRA) and our experience shows in the way that we deal with indiginous people to win hearts and minds, not kick ass and take names.
Now this one simply shows that you cannot read english and I am wasting calories typing this that I could use for better things, like scratching. Several people, including me, already responded to the Ol' WMD argument taken from talking points from at least half a year ago.

As for the "supporting terrorists", that was policy of the State Dept. to insure "stability" over the human rights so that our companies could do business in the region. We found ourselves in bed with some of the worst, and we should not be proud of it, look what it brought upon ourselves.... *hint: 9/11*.

A drastic change in foreign policy was not only called for but entirely necessary. The US must realize that keeping allies like Saddam and the Taliban was a mistake and one of the very reasons that the Terrorists attacked us and stop such activity and work to end all threats directly, not through old, and proven ineffective, State Dept. policies.
 
Pasquinade said:
...Also one final point, I have served in both the US and British military and the "kick ass" mentality that permeates through the US military is to be quite honest ineffective in dealing with combat situations, one only has to look at how many British casualties so far and how many American, quite a difference I believe. We have had many years of dealing with terrorists (The IRA) and our experience shows in the way that we deal with indiginous people to win hearts and minds, not kick ass and take names.

That is exactly why the UK is no longer a world power! And who can forget how well the British Army did in dealing with Northern Ireland...won lots of hearts and minds there!

Could be there are more American casualties because there are more Americans over there, performing more dangerous missions, in more dangerous places than the candy -ass Brits....naw that couldn't be right.
 
We did win a lot of hearts and minds in NI but good news is rarely reported.Many a time irish catholics would come out of their house with trays of tea and biscuits for us. Unfortunatly the local bully boys would end up threatening these people into not having anything to do with us.
 
taff said:
We did win a lot of hearts and minds in NI but good news is rarely reported.Many a time irish catholics would come out of their house with trays of tea and biscuits for us. Unfortunatly the local bully boys would end up threatening these people into not having anything to do with us.
Now doesn't that sound familiar somehow?
 
Very similar - no arguments there.Whilst the world looked at us as an occupying force if we had pulled out the loyalists threatened civil war.We were stuck there if we liked it or not.Not to different again to present circumstances
 
taff said:
Very similar - no arguments there.Whilst the world looked at us as an occupying force if we had pulled out the loyalists threatened civil war.We were stuck there if we liked it or not.Not to different again to present circumstances
Yep...I always thought the situation in Ireland was a tough row to hoe for the British Army.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top