- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,518
- 2,165
- Banned
- #81
The neo-cons still pant and chant with nothing to control their bed wetting.
Sooner or later, Bush will be caught and tried.
Sooner or later, Bush will be caught and tried.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
From your link:
"Before employing military force in Iraq, the resolution requires that the president first determine that continued diplomatic efforts "or other peaceful means alone," will not "adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
There was no continued threat to the worlds remaining super power from Iraq. The UN's diplomatic effort was underway and by Blix's final report showed that it was well on it's way to confirming Iraq had complied with the demands of the UN.
The UN's "diplomatic effort" was merely cover for the Oil for Food operation.
ODS HOME PAGE
There is an end-user problem. If you have reached this site from a web link,
- Through your internet options, adjust your privacy settings to allow cookies or
- Check your security settings and make sure this site has not been blocked or
- You are probably using a very slow link that may not work well with this application.
Otherwise you have reached this site through unauthorized means.
From your link:
There is an end-user problem. If you have reached this site from a web link,
- Through your internet options, adjust your privacy settings to allow cookies or
- Check your security settings and make sure this site has not been blocked or
- You are probably using a very slow link that may not work well with this application.
Otherwise you have reached this site through unauthorized means.
nice try velveeta, but american kids are still dying in afghanistan for nothing, gitmo is still open, and al qaeda is stronger than ever.
obozo may have pulled most of our troops out of Iraq, but he did not listen to the russian warnings about the boston bombers. Incompetence comes in all colors and party labels.
The bed wetters really stretch to give their messiah credit for ending the OIF war, when all he did was follow the Bush timeline. As unpopular as the war became, no sane Americans believed running away in the fashion the left championed was the proper solution.
Afghanistan is a complete goat fuck now. When I left in 2009 after 2 years I could see how things on the ground deteriorated. There was a vacuum of leadership from the top, and people were placed in jobs based on their political loyalty, over their competence.
Indeed AQ is significantly stronger, more so than they could have dreamed of. They've destabilized most of the middle east, they have sleeper operatives on our soil that can't even seem to be tracked when our "intelligence" agency is told about them, and they can attack our embassies without retaliation.
This isn't even about party anymore. It's about stupidity, incompetence, and a focused effort to harm this country.
Right .vs wrong, is right vs. left.
I have little doubt the left wants this country knocked down several notches. The "moderate" republicrooks are just along for the ride, and to try and make a few bucks. They'll work with whomever fullfils that end alone.
The "right" are people who have advanced fiscal sanity and want to empower individual citizens over corrupt buearucracies yet we are demonized as extremists, and of course racists by the bed wetters.
ot sure if you understand how our govt works
please read
U.S. Congress Authorizes Bush to Use Military Force Against Iraq
From your link:
"Before employing military force in Iraq, the resolution requires that the president first determine that continued diplomatic efforts "or other peaceful means alone," will not "adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
There was no continued threat to the worlds remaining super power from Iraq. The UN's diplomatic effort was underway and by Blix's final report showed that it was well on it's way to confirming Iraq had complied with the demands of the UN.
The UN's "diplomatic effort" was merely cover for the Oil for Food operation.
From your link:
"Before employing military force in Iraq, the resolution requires that the president first determine that continued diplomatic efforts "or other peaceful means alone," will not "adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
There was no continued threat to the worlds remaining super power from Iraq. The UN's diplomatic effort was underway and by Blix's final report showed that it was well on it's way to confirming Iraq had complied with the demands of the UN.
The UN's "diplomatic effort" was merely cover for the Oil for Food operation.
And as I stated
the US congress stated 10-2002 to remove Saddam as per the details within the legeslation
those details were met 1-27-2003 by the speech Hans Blix presented to the UN
It was clear Saddam was in Violation
It was known that Al Qaeda was there
It is this simple. all of the hub bub about this and that, none of this has ever beeen reported
Saddam had WMDs
no-one disputes that
WHere did they go is this question, nonthing else
Thnaks for your service
I have heard the same about the fall of morale and "winning" form others
Saddam had to go in my opinion post 9-11
AL qaeda was setting camp there
Once we invaded the rest showed up. Saddam was stealing money by selling oil on the black market and never telling the truth about weapons
he had 18 months to bury/ship most out
good reading here
Update 27 January 2003 - the United Nations
www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm*
Jan 27, 2003 THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 27 JANUARY 2003: AN UPDATE ON INSPECTION. Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, Dr. Hans Blix ...
Thnaks for your service
I have heard the same about the fall of morale and "winning" form others
Saddam had to go in my opinion post 9-11
AL qaeda was setting camp there
Once we invaded the rest showed up. Saddam was stealing money by selling oil on the black market and never telling the truth about weapons
he had 18 months to bury/ship most out
good reading here
Update 27 January 2003 - the United Nations
www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm*
Jan 27, 2003 – THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 27 JANUARY 2003: AN UPDATE ON INSPECTION. Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, Dr. Hans Blix ...
Thank you.
The AQ that existed in Iraq wasn't the same as Bin Laden's. They were motivated by the same dogma though. In Iraq we had local groups of displaced Sunni's who weren't concerned with "jihad". They wanted things to return to the Ba'athist power structure they enjoyed before. These groups ended up working with us to combat the foreign based jihadists. Some came from as far as indonesia, pakistan, yemen and chechnya, but their religious focus alienated them from the locals more concerned with their financial standing than their devotion to a cult.
When I left in Dec 05 after 11 months near An Nasiryah I was confident the war would be over in a couple years and that we had won.
I turned on CNN when we got home (as mistake I'll never make again) and was "informed" that we were lossing. We even had a senator insist we had lost.
Well quess what bed wetters, YOU and the jihadists lost. In spite of all your efforts to undermine the outcome.
All the WMD bullshit aside, saddam was a sociopathic despot that got what he deserved. Had we not allowed the leftwing UN to interfere in 1991, we could have solved the problem right away.
From your link:
There is an end-user problem. If you have reached this site from a web link,
- Through your internet options, adjust your privacy settings to allow cookies or
- Check your security settings and make sure this site has not been blocked or
- You are probably using a very slow link that may not work well with this application.
Otherwise you have reached this site through unauthorized means.
Weirds, works fine on my box.......
Update 27 January 2003 - the United Nations
www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm*
Jan 27, 2003 – THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 27 JANUARY 2003: AN UPDATE ON INSPECTION. Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, Dr. Hans Blix ...
here try this one
Full text: UN security council resolution 1441 on Iraq | World news | guardian.co.uk
From your link:
Weirds, works fine on my box.......
Update 27 January 2003 - the United Nations
www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm*
Jan 27, 2003 THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 27 JANUARY 2003: AN UPDATE ON INSPECTION. Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, Dr. Hans Blix ...
here try this one
Full text: UN security council resolution 1441 on Iraq | World news | guardian.co.uk
Update 27 January 2003 - the United Nations
www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm*
...
The UN's "diplomatic effort" was merely cover for the Oil for Food operation.
And as I stated
the US congress stated 10-2002 to remove Saddam as per the details within the legeslation
those details were met 1-27-2003 by the speech Hans Blix presented to the UN
It was clear Saddam was in Violation
It was known that Al Qaeda was there
It is this simple. all of the hub bub about this and that, none of this has ever beeen reported
Saddam had WMDs
no-one disputes that
WHere did they go is this question, nonthing else
If it was so clear then where is the UN resolution. As a member of the Security Council the US has responsiblibities to follow the rule of law. In this case President Bush has thrown out the precident his father worked so hard to create during the first gulf war. It was a breach of the UN Charter.
In 1991, resolution 687 (1991), adopted unanimously as a part of the cease-fire after the Gulf War, had five major elements. The three first related to disarmament. They called for :
declarations by Iraq of its programmes of weapons of mass destruction and long range missiles;
verification of the declarations through UNSCOM and the IAEA;
supervision by these organizations of the destruction or the elimination of proscribed programmes and items.
Iraq has declared that it only produced VX on a pilot scale, just a few tonnes and that the quality was poor and the product unstable. Consequently, it was said, that the agent was never weaponised. Iraq said that the small quantity of agent remaining after the Gulf War was unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991.
UNMOVIC, however, has information that conflicts with this account. There are indications that Iraq had worked on the problem of purity and stabilization and that more had been achieved than has been declared. Indeed, even one of the documents provided by Iraq indicates that the purity of the agent, at least in laboratory production, was higher than declared.
If it was so clear then where is the UN resolution. As a member of the Security Council the US has responsiblibities to follow the rule of law. In this case President Bush has thrown out the precident his father worked so hard to create during the first gulf war. It was a breach of the UN Charter.
If it was so clear then where is the UN resolution. As a member of the Security Council the US has responsiblibities to follow the rule of law. In this case President Bush has thrown out the precident his father worked so hard to create during the first gulf war. It was a breach of the UN Charter.
George the Younger instituted the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law of his father.
The USA had no legal cover to invade Iraq.
Bush will be taken sooner or later for trial.
It is has been the fact since the day of invasion when Bush became a war criminal.If it was so clear then where is the UN resolution. As a member of the Security Council the US has responsiblibities to follow the rule of law. In this case President Bush has thrown out the precident his father worked so hard to create during the first gulf war. It was a breach of the UN Charter.
George the Younger instituted the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law of his father.
The USA had no legal cover to invade Iraq.
Bush will be taken sooner or later for trial.
10 years later there is no substance to that argument, no trial. How long do we have to wait? 24 business hours?
Hussein is in his 2nd term. How long is it going to take for lefties to stop whining about the previous administration and deal with today's scandals.
It is has been the fact since the day of invasion when Bush became a war criminal.George the Younger instituted the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law of his father.
The USA had no legal cover to invade Iraq.
Bush will be taken sooner or later for trial.
10 years later there is no substance to that argument, no trial. How long do we have to wait? 24 business hours?
If it was so clear then where is the UN resolution. As a member of the Security Council the US has responsiblibities to follow the rule of law. In this case President Bush has thrown out the precident his father worked so hard to create during the first gulf war. It was a breach of the UN Charter.
George the Younger instituted the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law of his father.
The USA had no legal cover to invade Iraq.
Bush will be taken sooner or later for trial.
I seriously doubt that any US president will ever face trial, unless we were to lose a war like Germany did and the enemy occupies our country and capture our leaders. I just don't see that happening any time soon.