U.N. military action against Britain, U.S.?

WorldNetDaily ^ | March 15, 2003 | Art Moore

[Steven W.]

They might not even pass a resolution! France may insist they pass a resolution calling for "intrusive inspections"! why that'll stop GWB ... NOT! FREE IRAQ!

[way-right-of-center]

We should just invade France and give it to Isreal

[goldstategop]

People thought Ann Coulter was joking when she suggested we invade France after 9-11. Few people realized how prophetic she turned out to be.

[aynrandfreak]

This is Ellen's brother at it again. This is the same guy trying to change color of the firefighters raising the flag. I wish Fox would fire her for saying that she hopes the war goes badly since she wants to see Bush lose in '04

[A Navy Vet]

"Remember that we control neither the Suez nor the Panama canal."

We may not own them, but we definitely control 'em. That's a fact.

[ARCADIA]

"That would give us a great reason to fight back and take over France. Maybe we could give it to the Kurds... "

I hear the Palestinians are looking for a homeland, and we were looking at helping them to find one...

[Travis McGee]

We control the Panama Canal? How interesting. I have been through it, and seen it up close by land and water. The canal can be put out of action for months or years anytime anyone chooses to blow the Gatun Dam, just for one example. It's silly to say we "control" the canal, just silly.

[SPQR]

The core demonstrators against the war are anarchists who are bent on destroying the U.S. They should be arrested and sent to Guantanamo for a few years and lots of heavy duty interrogation.

U.N. forces would be obliterated if they tried to attack U.S. and British forces. Perhaps the French military could lead the first wave assault. Any U.N. attack on U.S. and British forces in the Middle East would leave the desert littered with little blue helmets covered with black burn markes and peppered with holes.

[ARCADIA]

Well look at the bright side. Human over population would cease to be a problem for quite a long time.

[kcordell]

This is Ellen's brother at it again.

I was wondering when someone would point out the relationship to Ellen.

Fox News sent Ellen to Iraq to be on the U.S.S. Kittyhaw. Two days later I read a news report that a journalist had been sent home for releasing sensitve information. This morning Ellen was on Fox reporting from BOSTON.

Just an observation.

[Capt_Hank]

I just emailed FNC about Ellen.... It's bad enough watching the weekend crew, then she rears her ugly head.

[The Wizard]

News Flash to these clymers:America IS the military force of the UN

[Jim Noble]

>>Aren't you afraid of "vicious" Cameroon attacking us?<<

No, but I am afraid of Russia, China, and Iran acting together under UN authority.

[Jim Noble]

You don't need to be a lawyer to understand Article III, section 3:

" Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

[Tench_Coxe]

No. That is sedition.

If we were actually at war, and these folks were actively assisting those considered hostile ( performing acts on the enemy's behalf domestically, providing aid and comfort to the enemy-think Jane Fonda ), then it is treason. Treason is a very hard thing to actually prosecute in the United States. That is a very good thing.

[way-right-of-center]

I was reasonably sure about treason, it was making the distinction between "treason" and "sedition" I was unclear about. I just wanted to make sure he verified that information somewhere else before he accepted it as the gospel.

[chiefqc]

"Boy I sure needed a good laugh this morning, Thanks".

[FairOpinion]

While Russia and China could certainly be a threat, they are also not stupid. While MAD officially doesn't exist, they know that if they start anything, we would retaliate.

So, they are not about to start WW III over Iraq. They have power, have weapons, but know the responsibility that goes with it.

Chirac, on the other hand, seems to think he is Napoleon. Deluded people like that are much more dangerous, because they are too stupid to really consider the consequences of their actions.

[teletech]

I'm not lawyer, but I think treason is giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy I think encouraging the overthrow ofyour gov't and making harmful statement about them is sedition, but once again, I am a YMCA director, not a lawyer

Ok, sedition. I call it pathetic!

[teletech]

No. That is sedition.

If we were actually at war, and these folks were actively assisting those considered hostile ( performing acts on the enemy's behalf domestically, providing aid and comfort to the enemy-think Jane Fonda ), then it is treason. Treason is a very hard thing to actually prosecute in the United States. That is a very good thing.

So what you are saying is if this activity persists AFTER the war starts, THEN it's treason?