Marines leaving Iraq!!!!!

[jillian]

See posts above for specific LEGAL authorization to invade Iraq. As far as the right to invade? Please see the plethora of UN security council resolutions that LEGALLY authorized un to invade Iraq.
Hint: It was legal

Oh Dr. Grump...you are blinded by your petty hatred of America and her pro-active foreign policy. Yet when the shit hit's the fan you and other european types begin to whine "Where's America???!!! Why didn't they stop it!!!???? Please try to remember if it wasn't for us intervening on your country's behalf in WW2 more than likely you would have squinty eyes and buck teeth.

and as far as Israel...why don't you put "invade Israel" in your government's suggestion box.

There was no legal authorization to invade Iraq the SECOND TIME.

FWIW, I've known Grump for almost seven years. He doesn't hate America at all. And the overly aggressive foreign policy of Dubya was offensive to most people outside of the U.S. and a good number of us here.

I don't think we intervened on behalf of his country either, though his country sent a lot of people to help the war effort.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

See posts above for specific LEGAL authorization to invade Iraq. As far as the right to invade? Please see the plethora of UN security council resolutions that LEGALLY authorized un to invade Iraq.
Hint: It was legal

Oh Dr. Grump...you are blinded by your petty hatred of America and her pro-active foreign policy. Yet when the shit hit's the fan you and other european types begin to whine "Where's America???!!! Why didn't they stop it!!!???? Please try to remember if it wasn't for us intervening on your country's behalf in WW2 more than likely you would have squinty eyes and buck teeth.

and as far as Israel...why don't you put "invade Israel" in your government's suggestion box.

There was no legal authorization to invade Iraq the SECOND TIME.

FWIW, I've known Grump for almost seven years. He doesn't hate America at all. And the overly aggressive foreign policy of Dubya was offensive to most people outside of the U.S. and a good number of us here.

I don't think we intervened on behalf of his country either, though his country sent a lot of people to help the war effort.

Please see Battle of the Coral Sea for the history of our intervention on behalf of New Zealand.

What the good Dr. is not seeing is this. If we just let it all go and say "oh well, **** it" and blame ourselves for what happened the terrorists would NEVER stop. Do I agree with Bush's decision to invade Iraq? No. Do I support it and his policy of pre-emptive war? Unequivocally yes. There is no question that this has saved countless American lives. He was my Commander in Chief and I support all of his policies...just as I must now support all of the current President's policies even though I disagree with them in a political context. That's where Dr. Grump and CurveLight cannot make the distinction....and that is why they have lost the argument here.

 

[CurveLight]

Hint: You won't find anything in any search engine...so don't bother....you have NOTHING CurveLight...NOTHING to back up your CLAIMS.

ROTFL! Now you're just trying to convince yourself. Shut your eyes a little tighter.

Cite your specific case law regarding the Iraq Use of Force Agreement and it's legality.

You just ignored what the legal experts have said on the totally baseless claim they are anti-war. You are a waste of time.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

ROTFL! Now you're just trying to convince yourself. Shut your eyes a little tighter.

Cite your specific case law regarding the Iraq Use of Force Agreement and it's legality.

You just ignored what the legal experts have said on the totally baseless claim they are anti-war. You are a waste of time.

Legal experts voiced OPINIONS!!!! That is NOT case law!!!!!

What exactly are you having trouble understanding here?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Hey PP I am going to have to disagree with you on this one point..............

"Do I support it and his policy of pre-emptive war? Unequivocally yes."

Iraq was NOT pre-emptive which is LEGAL Iraq was PREVENTITIVE which is NOT legal. Pre-emptive indicates that there is an IMMINENT THREAT. For example if we found the Japanese fleet within striking distance of Pearl Harbour we would be TOTALLY justified in attacking them and going to war. If we found out that they were building a fleet that would be at some time in the future capable of striking Pearl Harbour and we sunk their ships in their ports that would be an ILLEGAL PREVENTITIVE act of war.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The fact that it's the opinion of many on the left that Iraq was pre-emptive war is one of their main bitches about Bush.

but since the use of military force was authorized by the UN and further re-enforced by the Iraq Use of Force Resolution...all opinions on what was what are just that....opinions. Until the IUOFA is PROVEN TO BE ILLEGAL in a U.S. court of law...no one has a leg to stand on....all they have are opinions..

That's the bottom line.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Again, The US Ambassador with the British Ambassador agreeing with him that the war was indeed legal.

Discussion on UN Resolution 1441
"This resolution contains no 'hidden triggers' and no 'automaticity' with respect to the use of force. If there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by UNMOVIC, the IAEA, or a Member State, the matter will return to the council for discussion….[But] if the Security Council fails to act decisively in the event of further Iraqi violations, this resolution does not constrain any member state from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by Iraq or to enforce the relevant United Nations resolutions and protect world peace and security."( U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Negroponte)(The British ambassador, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, agreed. )
International Law - War in Iraq - United Nations - Iraq

Now I have to wonder, If there truly was a case for the war to be illegal:

1. Why hasn't someone in the USA sued the Government over it ?

2. Where are the UN Sanctions against the USA ?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

again, the us ambassador with the british ambassador agreeing with him that the war was indeed legal.

Discussion on un resolution 1441
"this resolution contains no 'hidden triggers' and no 'automaticity' with respect to the use of force. If there is a further iraqi breach, reported to the council by unmovic, the iaea, or a member state, the matter will return to the council for discussion….[but] if the security council fails to act decisively in the event of further iraqi violations, this resolution does not constrain any member state from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by iraq or to enforce the relevant united nations resolutions and protect world peace and security."( u.s. Ambassador to the u.n. John negroponte)(the british ambassador, sir jeremy greenstock, agreed. )
international law - war in iraq - united nations - iraq

now i have to wonder, if there truly was a case for the war to be illegal:

1. Why hasn't someone in the usa sued the government over it ?

2. Where are the un sanctions against the usa ?

exactly!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Basically you are saying it was an EXTENSION of the original GW which I would agree with you on. I just don't like the use of the term PRE-EMPTIVE because they did NOT pose an EMMINENT threat. IMHO.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Basically you are saying it was an EXTENSION of the original GW which I would agree with you on. I just don't like the use of the term PRE-EMPTIVE because they did NOT pose an EMMINENT threat. IMHO.

and that is precisely where the anti-war crowd has placed their marbles yet there is absolutely no court cases in the United States that have arrived at their conclusions based on sound proof and legal precedent...hence the argument that legally...the war in Iraq was in fact legal as no one has proven otherwise at this point in time.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I'm going to the gym...I'll be back later

 

[CurveLight]

Basically you are saying it was an EXTENSION of the original GW which I would agree with you on. I just don't like the use of the term PRE-EMPTIVE because they did NOT pose an EMMINENT threat. IMHO.

That is exactly why it is illegal. They keep citing R1441 but refuse to address the fact it purposefully points out there must be a new UNSC Vote to approve resuming military action. The No Fly Zones were illegal so people cannot refer to iraq firing on our aircraft that violated Iraqi airspace.

 

[CurveLight]

I'm going to the gym...I'll be back later

Damn. Your arrogance is beyond scope. Nobody gives a **** where you are going.

 

[jillian]

Exactly...so all it is is spin from the left.

Now can you tell, me as a lawyer...does a Judge dismissing a charge equate to a finding of "not guilty" or "aquittal"?

depends on the point in the proceeding at which they're dismissed and the basis for the dismissal.

 

[jillian]

Yes...they did.

No. They didn't. In fact, Kofi Annan specifically called it illegal on September 16, 2004.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iraq war illegal, says Annan

Sorry Jillian...you left out the part of the story that said this....

When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

Now...this is where the war was legal from the standpoint of the UN....Resolution 1441authorizes the use of military force against Iraq. What part of "all necessary means" is confusing everyone?

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all
necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore
international peace and security in the area,

ODS HOME PAGE

and then there is this LAW signed by our Congress...

US Government Printing Office - FDsys - More Information

The sooner you progressives realize that OUR OWN NATIONAL SECURITY and OUR OWN LAWS trump International law...the sooner we can move on.

and then theres this...if the war was illegal...how come no charges have been filed against anyone? How come there have been no trials of anyone?

Sorry...you guys just have to accept the fact that the war WAS LEGAL. Now move on.

NO ONE HERE has provided specific proof that the war in Iraq was illegal. Not a single one. I've made my case for it's legality and apparently, the the law is on my side. All you guys have is opinion...not a single fact proven in any court of law.

1. our congress can't make something legal under international law which isn't.

2. iraq was allowing inspections. if you look at the final report of hans blix, it was clear that all access issues had been resolved. so were they, in fact, in violation at the time we invaded? And it wasn't up to us to unilaterally determine whether they were in violation.

3. bush didn't even comply with our own resolution which required that he exhaust all diplomatic efforts AND return to congress with specific reports BEFORE attacking Iraq.

4, We had no security interest in attacking Iraq....which had nothing to do with the attack on us. It was like attackig mexico after the japanese bombed pearl harbor.

 

[Dr Grump]

See posts above for specific LEGAL authorization to invade Iraq. As far as the right to invade? Please see the plethora of UN security council resolutions that LEGALLY authorized un to invade Iraq.
Hint: It was legal

Oh Dr. Grump...you are blinded by your petty hatred of America and her pro-active foreign policy. Yet when the shit hit's the fan you and other european types begin to whine "Where's America???!!! Why didn't they stop it!!!???? Please try to remember if it wasn't for us intervening on your country's behalf in WW2 more than likely you would have squinty eyes and buck teeth.

and as far as Israel...why don't you put "invade Israel" in your government's suggestion box.

Having and then making it legal are two different things..

I have never asked "where's America"..

and you haven't a clue about WWII with regard to NZ

The Battle of the Coral Sea had nothing to do with Japan's designs on NZ..

I have no hatred for America, just an extreme dislike for neocon whackjobs who are all about "freedom and the American way" until they open their yaps, and they start sounding like everything they claim to despise..

 

[CurveLight]

See posts above for specific LEGAL authorization to invade Iraq. As far as the right to invade? Please see the plethora of UN security council resolutions that LEGALLY authorized un to invade Iraq.
Hint: It was legal

Oh Dr. Grump...you are blinded by your petty hatred of America and her pro-active foreign policy. Yet when the shit hit's the fan you and other european types begin to whine "Where's America???!!! Why didn't they stop it!!!???? Please try to remember if it wasn't for us intervening on your country's behalf in WW2 more than likely you would have squinty eyes and buck teeth.

and as far as Israel...why don't you put "invade Israel" in your government's suggestion box.

Having and then making it legal are two different things..

I have never asked "where's America"..

and you haven't a clue about WWII with regard to NZ

The Battle of the Coral Sea had nothing to do with Japan's designs on NZ..

I have no hatred for America, just an extreme dislike for neocon whackjobs who are all about "freedom and the American way" until they open their yaps, and they start sounding like everything they claim to despise..

Dumbasses like him think the US was the world's savior in WW2 which is why they always refer to Germany and Japan to defend the installation of "long term" bases in Irafghaqistan. Honestly, at one time I was a Nationalist like PP and a few others so while I understand their self chosen cloak of ignorance it doesn't make it any less frustrating.

There is nothing any of us can say nor any information we can provide that will get people like him to admit the US did anything illegal or immoral.

 

[Dr Grump]

There is nothing any of us can say nor any information we can provide that will get people like him to admit the US did anything illegal or immoral.

I know, but you can live in hope....

 

[CurveLight]

There is nothing any of us can say nor any information we can provide that will get people like him to admit the US did anything illegal or immoral.

I know, but you can live in hope....

I try but man, there is some seriously nasty shit coming our way. You cannot do what we have done over the past decade and escape the pendulum. Just as the character of a person determines her/his destiny the same is true for a nation.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

1. our congress can't make something legal under international law which isn't.

Therefore by passing The Iraq use of Force Resolution THE WAR WAS LEGAL!!!!!