Posted on 09/09/2005 9:17:19 AM PDT by xt5rt45
Why would anyone want to lend credence to U.N. resolutions? If having the most powerful nation on the planet enforce U.N. resolutions isn't a form of world government, what is?
Honestly can't give you one beyond the first few paragraphs, therein being far too much distortion of fact and resort to fallacious logic to justify continuing. E.g. Bush did enumerate, repeatedly and from the very beginning, the whole panoply of consilient reasons for war, including the need for regional transformation; there was evidence for contact and cooperation between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeada, and the quantity and quality of that evidence has only improved since the war, etc, etc.
I guess my main reaction is sadness. Even though I happen to be "pro-war" I believe we need principled iconoclasts like Ron Paul. At least I used to believe he was principled. The extreme intellectual dishonesty he resorts to here, however, tends to change my opion. Again it's unfortunate. I want "my side" to be challenged by having to engage the best and strongest counter arguments. Yet Ron Pauls argument (from what I read of it) seems so infested with error and fallacy as to be all to easily refuted or dismissed.
Sheltonmac: But I guess the fact that we haven't had a terrorist attack on our soil in four whole years is all the proof some people need that the war in Iraq is working to thwart a global terrorist network.
My son's service has made a difference. He has been part of the solution. Your insults are part of the problem. You belong with the likes of Cindy Sheehan. You won't catch me pi$$ing all over my son's service to this great nation.
And it's not because I'm too stupid to know that it takes more than just my son to save the world, as you suggest in your reply to me. I know that it takes a hell of a lot more than just my son, and all the other sons and daughters in the military, sacrificing for your ungrateful @$$. It takes a hell of a lot more, but we couldn't do it without them.
It is not stupid to support our troops. It is not stupid to see the progress that's been made. It is not stupid to recognize the fact that Afghanistan and Iraq were both a threat to us. It is not stupid to know the truth.
Anyone who thinks Hanoi Kerry isn't behind the anti war crowd needs to get a clue.
There is no need to impeach Hanoi Kerry from the US Senate
He is there illegally!
WAKEUP AMERICA!
For those who "forgot" what Hanoi Kerry
did in the past read on and learn the truth.
Hanoi Kerry was still a USNR officer while he:
gave false hearsay testimony to Congress
negotiated with the enemy
helped the US lose a war
abetted in the deaths of millions
created a hostile environment for all servicemen
Why is Kerry still in the US Senate?
This is in violation of
U.S. Constitution Amendment 14 Sec 3
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html
And the FBI has proof of his treason.
Hanoi Kerry Timeline of a traitor
includes FBI files
May 1970
Kerry and Julia traveled to Paris, France and met with Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, the Foreign Minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of Vietnam (PRG), the political wing of the Vietcong, and other Viet Cong and Communist Vietnamese representatives to the Paris peace talks, a trip he now calls a "fact-finding" mission.
(U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953, declares it illegal for a U.S. citizen to go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power.)
http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html
a) A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war,
or with any offense punishable by death,
may be tried at any time without limitation.
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#*%20843.%20ART.%2043.%20STATUTE%20OF%20LIMITATIONS
Distribute these url's!
Links to Anti Kerry sites
212 LINKS
News reports,
Viper's Vietnam Veterans Page
http://members.aol.com/ga1449ga/links/links.html
EXPOSE HANOI KERRY!
MUST SEE WEBSITE!!!!
http://www.kerrystreason.com/index.html
Full details on these url's!
http://tonkin.spymac.net
There is a backup site
if the 1st url is unavailable.
http://stophanoikerry.150m.com
Did you see this...?
(The 'Kerry's Promise Counter')
http://polipundit.com/index.php?p=6628
Polipundit even tells you how to install it on your own page!
aid and comfort to the enemy is treason. you get a life. talk about whining: nobody whines like a steaming pile of libertine-arian
The interesting thing is that is exactly what some people here want. They claim to be concerned about their relatives in the military, yet want to see them fighting over a billion Muslims. Go figure.
Excuse me? Are you telling me I imagined the whole 9-11-01 thingy? Wasn't that on American soil? Was that okie-dokie with you? Well, I didn't much care for it. I'm not particularly pleased with the individuals who carried it out, or the nations who gave them the resources to do so. You may disagree, but I don't see how. Then again, I don't understand Cindy Sheehan peeing on her son's grave.
Bump to that!
That's what Saddam said! LOL He says, "self, why would anyone want to lend credence to UN resolutions". So he ignored them. Unfortunately for him, 90+ nations disagreed with him. He was allowed to remain in power after invading Kuwait only because he agreed to abide by those UN Resolutions.
Saddam defied the UN for 11 years. If I remember correctly, there were 16 UN Resolutions.
Your second question is based on faulty reasoning. You are implying that it was only the United States that finally enforced the UN Resolutions, which is totally incorrect so no, it wasn't a form of "world government". Apparently you have conveniently forgotten about all of the other nations who came together to enforce these resolutions and FINALLY hold Saddam accountable for his actions.
Are you seriously suggesting that Americans didn't engage in enough anti-American propaganda during the Viet Nam War? Please tell me that's not what you meant.
Ewww, it's one of those threads that makes me wonder if I wandered into DU.
I've tried reasoning with some of these people before, but they watch the news a lot, so they know way more than I do.
BTTT!!!!!!!!
Yes, you clearly do. You even employ the same logical fallacies. (Complex Question and False Dilemma.)
Okay, so multiple nations came together to enforce U.N. resolutions against a sovereign country. That makes me feel better.
I'm all for varying points of view, but you ought to chill, newbie.
So because Iraq was a sovereign nation, Saddam should not have abided by an agreement he signed? Please explain the jump in logic.
Roger that!
Be polite.
Be professional.
But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.