ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
So did George Bush blow up the twin towers?
It's a done deal now
- Thread starter ChesusRice
- Start date
iblazetoomuch
Active Member
Assad is still subject to international law of U.N. and NATO; so his personal signatory status doesn't matter. U.N. and NATO were both part of the intelligence fail with iraq and geman informant on WMD stockpiles and mobile labs ect. Both are just extended arms of the US foreign policy as you can imagine they never conflict with each other (us military and U.N./NATO); there are joint operations centers so the international law he has to follow is subject to double standards, as you can imagine US has killed 50,000-100,000 in japan vs a non nuclear country at the time could have easily wiped them off the maps with conventional munitions but the german invasion and thrust into the bigger picture made the japanese nuke scenario plausible for taking sides with the nazis and attacking pre-emptively, I don't think they were under much threat from the US personally and made their own faulty choice to side with nazis during a crucial point of the invasion of europe and russian territories.
It would be considered a war crime under many circumstances if the offender is not the main arm of the law makers, Iraq WMDs never materialized and they never actually held anyone personally responsible, although I don't recall the fate of the guy who lied to german intel then the CIA, I'm sure he didn't live to good afterwards when they found out he fabricated the stuff. He was a amateur or self taught nuclear engineer of some sort, he did have enough knowledge to fool the intelligence agencies into believing his information and specifics, which I doubt the average person could do very easily. Anyhow, there was some credibility lost in bush, rumsfeld, mccain, and colin powell, as they all implied we would find all these WMDs over and over again leading up to the invasion.
Those instances instead of a media story and debate would constitute prosecution in a non alliance/first world country when dealing with NATO/U.N.; It's a pretty apparent double standard, besides the elevated cancer rates and birth defects in iraq after initial invasion. Firing a weapon at anyone is a violation if international law, if you justify a war or cause with the law makers your pretty much immune to the laws, while single soldiers who lost their mental capabilities and may have killed innocent people or committed fratricide on other soldiers were arrested ect, I'm talking in a general country diplomatic relationship sense, A non ally country will not get a pass on invading another country with fabricated evidence of WMDs, but US/UK/EU/coalition of the willing did get a big pass there, and public opinion is still pretty decisive in how fail of a intelligence gaff that was for the US administration at the time.
Why would you think the US never violated international law, because it made it? Lol? Uh dude, look at vietnam we bombed that soley for geopolitical power to prevent a communist state and domino effect of communist states to fall after with indochina; there was no genocide of any significant proportions or WMDs....I don't know how much "proven" you want, I think proven is subjective to what country your from and talking about really.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
US intelligence didnt Fail on Iraq. The administration Failed on Iraq. The intelligence community got it right.
Cheney set up a special office in the White house to cherry pick unsubstantiated claims. Bush in every speech he intertwined Iraq and 9/11 in the same paragraphs
Cheney set up a special office in the White house to cherry pick unsubstantiated claims. Bush in every speech he intertwined Iraq and 9/11 in the same paragraphs
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Do people actually read posts or do they just look at them and assume the content????? Ffs.
i said 'reasearch for yourself' .... Im not in the bussiness of mind bending... Although i suspect yours isnt hard to bend?
Read up on cassus belli - look at some of historys examples... Mostly US wars. And then its not so hard to beleive that bush was probably involved...
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
yes it does, thats the ONLY thing that matters. nato has no authority outside it's status as a mutual defense treaty organization, and the chemical weapons charter has no power over those who did not sign it.
you are 100% wrong on this.
if a nation legalizes weed, then weed is legal there, if a country signs a treaty promising not to use chemical weapons, they are barred from using chemical weapons, if they do NOT sign such aa treaty, they arte NOT barred from using chemical weapons (except if they use them on a signatory to that treaty, the non signatory will face the wrath of every signatory, as spelled out in that treaty)
see, lets take anothe rexample: isreal is NOT a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, as such they get NO BENEFITS from being part of the treaty, but they are likewise no barred from developing nuclear weapons. see how that works? no treaty, no problem.
massive pile of non sequitur. this has NO relevance to the issue at hand, which is syria and the proposed military strikes.
more irrelevant nonsense
EVEN MORE irrelevant nonsense, this time i cant even figure out what your saying... something about the press beiung laible for a story that turns out to be false, and newspaperment going to jail for war crimes? i dunno.
nope.
too much lefty thought has corrupted your drug addled brain.
still waiting for those examples of PROVEN cases of the US violating international law.
your baseless allegations are still just BASELESS ALLEGATIONS no matter how smugly you declare them.
The whole united states machine is an example of such violations...
'you can lead a horse to water but you cant make it drink...' Unfortunately in this case... If you breed the thickest and most confused horse from a pony... And controlled what it saw, heard and done throujout its life.....heck, you could make it drink fresh crude oil from the feilds of the middle east.... Which are you? The pony.... The leader... Or the old confused horse who stands by his leader blind to his own hipocrisy?
'you can lead a horse to water but you cant make it drink...' Unfortunately in this case... If you breed the thickest and most confused horse from a pony... And controlled what it saw, heard and done throujout its life.....heck, you could make it drink fresh crude oil from the feilds of the middle east.... Which are you? The pony.... The leader... Or the old confused horse who stands by his leader blind to his own hipocrisy?
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
When they call you a pig dog, and then spit in your face, what do you expect? War ain't nice, bro. Which is why I'm 100% against war for any reason. Do you think they're nicer? Or we should just be better? You live in a fantasy world. Life isn't a bunch of rainbows, fluffy clouds and pink elephants.
don't even get me started at what happened in My Lai.
Don't even get me started with what the super hero Mohammad did to women who scorned him.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
enhanced interrogation (better known as torture) is not only a direct violation of international law, it is a stupid way of trying to get information according to the best interrogators we have.
shocking a man's testicles and waterboarding him produces false leads, arranging a divorce for him (even if it is a lie) will get you to bin laden;s courier.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
So Mohammad ripping apart a woman over several hours with a camel, who refused to suck his dick after doing scorched earth against her tribe, is cool with you? That's the sort of shit you're dealing with. That's their superhero Islam thinks is so dreamy! That movie which Obama blamed for the Ben Ghazi attack, isn't made up. Mohammad made Ghanghis Khan look like a boy scout. Yet, Islam means peace? You smoking crack, bro?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
that has nothing whatsoever to do with torture or international laws, so i guess i will play your game.
the hula hoop was invented in 1958.
christians who claim to hate aborted fetuses (killing babies, as they so dishonestly say) also love to kill abortion doctors and make death pacts with their wives.
christianity: religion of peace?
echelon1k1
New Member
You are wrong on many levels, i'm just too stoned atm to be bothered correcting you...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
that's part of the strategy of being long-winded, wean down rebuttals by attrition. if there is too much nonsense to correct it becomes overwhelming.
more elegantly put, he can't dazzle with brilliance so he baffles with bullshit.
echelon1k1
New Member
According to the best interrogators you have;
Ex-CIA Interrogator: Obama's War on Terror Is Less Ethical Than Bush's
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
echelon1k1
New Member
those guys were just following orders... These techniques stemmed from a book called the arab mindcheney and Rumsfeld are ultimately to blame as this is exactly the play they had in mind and they personally authorised these programs.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I'm not a Christian.
I HATE all religions. They're all brainwashing cults, especially the mainstream ones like Christianity, Islam, etc.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
well when it comes to being a hypocrite about human life, you are one in the same as the doctor killing murder haters.I'm not a Christian.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I don't get in bed with murderers, because I respect life. Those who disrespect life get my wrath. Just don't be a douche and try to tell me killing your baby is a woman's right. I'll fight for that baby even though you call it a parasite.
Do you think that I feel it's so awesome once the baby is born nobody gives a shit about it then either? That's fucked up too. If I ever saw someone do to a child what was done to me, there'd be nothing left of them.
You lefties only respect life once it can say, "Gimmie FREE SHIT!"