Where do you think the WOT should be fought?

[xen]

So much for your pride------you don't even dare to say what you really think to our troops--and yet you think you support them???????????????????? :finger:

You're the ones who wouldnt support the troops IF you believed the war was illegal. :finger:

 

[Said1]

I understand the purpose of the link. Said, Bush never stated that that was the reason we were going into Iraq. If that was such a valid basis, why would he leave that out?

The insurgents were not there when we invaded.

He didn't leave it out.

The insurgents were there in the beginning, the first attacks occured in May 2003, when coalition forces arrived in Baghdad.

 

[Annie]

You're the ones who wouldnt support the troops IF you believed the war was illegal. :finger:

Nope, you are wrong. You can't do both.

 

[xen]

He didn't leave it out.

The insurgents were there in the beginning, the first attacks occured in May 2003, when coalition forces arrived in Baghdad.

There were no insurgents!

 

[Said1]

There were no insurgents!

What were they then?? They certainly weren't part of the Iraqi National Guard.

 

[xen]

Nope, you are wrong. You can't do both.

So you WOULDNT support the troops?

 

[Annie]

So you WOULDNT support the troops?

Cute. Can't 'support the troops' and say their mission is illegal. They go hand-in-hand. To say otherwise is to condemn them to obeying illegal orders.

 

[insein]

So you WOULDNT support the troops?

No i believe the correct phrase is, th war is not illegal so supporting the troops is valid.

 

[xen]

What were they then?? They certainly weren't part of the Iraqi National Guard.

How do you come to that conclusion?

Personally I believe we are fighting iraqi factions mostly, and the terrorists flowing into the country are doing the suicide bombing and other civilian attacks to fuel the fire.

 

[xen]

No i believe the correct phrase is, th war is not illegal so supporting the troops is valid.

No im asking you guys.

IF the war was illegal, would you support the troops?

 

[Annie]

No im asking you guys.

IF the war was illegal, would you support the troops?

Not going there, the war was NOT illegal.

 

[Said1]

How do you come to that conclusion?

I made it up. Man, is your google button not showing, look it up.

Personally I believe we are fighting iraqi factions mostly, and the terrorists flowing into the country are doing the suicide bombing and other civilian attacks to fuel the fire.

If they are Iraqi factions, they are more than likely working in cahoots with other organizations, I doubt they're working independantly of one another just to "fuel the fire". Hey, how do ya like that, Iraqi terrorists, who'd a thunk it?

Anyway, the point is, there were incidences of insurgent attacks on coaliton forces as early as May 2003, regardless of the perpetrators.

 

[Said1]

No im asking you guys.

IF the war was illegal, would you support the troops?

If it were Canadian soldiers no.

I don't like war of any kind, but understand it's nessesity at times i.e: I support Canadian troops, but dislike war.

 

[xen]

Not going there, the war was NOT illegal.

But IF it was, you wouldnt support the troops? I cant believe that.

 

[xen]

If it were Canadian soldiers no.

I don't like war of any kind, but understand it's nessesity at times i.e: I support Canadian troops, but dislike war.

I would support canadian troops.

 

[xen]

I made it up.

I figured.

I doubt they're working independantly of one another just to "fuel the fire".

You're most likely correct.

..the point is, there were incidences of insurgent attacks on coaliton forces as early as May 2003, regardless of the perpetrators.

If mexico invaded I would rpg them within a month too.

 

[Said1]

I figured.
You're most likely correct.

Dumb

If mexico invaded I would rpg them within a month too.

Dumber.

 

[xen]

Dumb
Dumber.

Dumbest.

 

[no1tovote4]

I understand the purpose of the link. Said, Bush never stated that that was the reason we were going into Iraq. If that was such a valid basis, why would he leave that out?

The insurgents were not there when we invaded.

He didn't leave that out, Bush was not the only person in the administration talking about this. Colin Powell, in front of the UN, made this case as well as the WMD case that we later found to be a false tiger. That you choose to forget that there is more than one person in the administration and that this argument was made before we went into Iraq doesn't make it true, it simply means you conveniently "forget" inconvenient facts.

 

[no1tovote4]

Well, I guess I am closed minded. Dillo, I totally do not support this war. I have a hard time giving Bush the benefit of the doubt anymore.

Somehow I doubt that you ever did. You were probably one of those that believed the 2000 election was "stolen" and from the start were against almost any move he might have made regardless of intent or success.