US 2008 Presidential Campaign/Debate Discussion Thread - Part Catorce! - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-02-2008, 04:08 PM   #196
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


Gitmo needs to stay open
Detainees should have the right to challenge their detentions and a right to a fair trial. Otherwise, Gitmo is a charade that gets used for political purposes.
__________________

__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 04:11 PM   #197
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,692
Local Time: 07:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Wow. Talk about stupid statements.
What? He said that, not me.


Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2

Hey, there's another one. Apparently you don't really mind making completely false statements as long as they might get a laugh, right?
What? Either Ron Paul wrote those racist statement, or he let someone else write them and he published a book under his name without proofreading it. So that makes him a) racist or b)moron.

Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2

You've never misspoken? Obama or Hillary have never misspoken? Wow, we can all take lessons from them.
I've never mispoken that big. I'm sure there are other examples, that was just the first that came to mind.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-02-2008, 05:05 PM   #198
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow

Again, if the UN thought the war was really illegal, why was their not a single attempt to condemn it on the day it started or to call for an end to hostilities? You either ignore or are unwilling to answer these simple factual questions.


i can't say it any more than i already have. with STING, we see the difference between details and facts, and the difference between details and nuance.

the US has to abide by international law when it chooses to. that is what was made clear by the Iraq invasion. there is no authority that could force the US government to abide by international law, in the way that there are plenty of authorties who could force Saddam Hussein of 1990 to abide by international law.

what else was the UN to do? they passed 1483 in order to try to work with an invasion that had already happened, as well as try to hold the US accountable for the welfare of the Iraqi people. it does NOT expressly legalize the occupation. it deals with the reality as it is. the invasion of Iraq was a fait accompli, and the resolution was designed to both compel the US/UK to restore soverignty to the Iraqi people as soon as possible as well as give the UN itself a role in the post-war process.

you are unwilling to grasp any sense of nuance or complexity because your arguments hold no water. not all things are exactly the same.

i'm not much interested in the Clinton's view of the war. why would that matter to me, and why would you poitnt to that as some sort of supporting evidence? it isn't. it could well be that the Clintons are wrong about something.

i will spell out 1441 for you for the last time.

1441 threatens "consequences" if Iraq did not comply with its demands. but it is up to the Security Council -- and not the United States -- to determine precisely what those consequences were. 678 does not provide precedent that war is the *only* consequence for a violation of 1441. what all these resolutions do is leave "intent" in the eyes of the beholder, giving everyone enough wiggle room to craft whatever argument they want to justify whatever position they wish. and there is no question it is NOT a *clear* mandate for invasion.

it is also a blatant lie that "serious consequences" is a stronger expression of war than "all necessary means." in fact, “serious consequences” is a formulation that falls far short of allowing “all necessary means" which, if you'll do some research, is the traditional UN euphemism for armed force. if that particular phrases were used, then France and Russia would have vetoed 1441. thus, they went for vaguer language, and then claimed -- as you falsely do now -- that the phrases mean the same thing.

it is only the Security Council that can make such a decision as to what the consequences will be. it is expressly clear that the majority of its members however, have made clear that the resolution does not justify the waging of war. thus, that is why they did pass Resolution 1441. because it did NOT justify the invasion. the bottom line is that nine members of the Security Council, including the five permanent members, need actively to support the use of force.

and, ultimately, legal or not, the war was a bad idea from the start
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 05:09 PM   #199
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram

Six months ago, I also thought Hillary would run away with the nomination. But things change, and we change with them. Unlike your dear leader.


keep in mind, you're talking to someone who sees no differences between Afghanistan and Iraq.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 05:57 PM   #200
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 06:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


McCain bashes the two of them on how they handle the occupation, but not on the strategic decision to remove Saddam from power. While Cheney and Rumsfeld both made mistakes, they had far better Judgement than Obama on the issue, who would prefer to have Saddam in power threatening the Persian Gulf and the world in 2008.



Threatening the world with no army, no navy, no nuclear weapons. Iraq was/is a country Iran alone can invade at any moment of the day if it wants.



Neo-cons tend to make this image of Saddam that just because he was a dictator, he had the power of a Soviet Union type of military to invade the world. And by the way, did we even need to invade the Soviet Union?
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 05:59 PM   #201
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:45 PM
We will see if David
(little Hill, all by herself)

can slay

Goliath
(that three-headed monster - Obama- Teddy - Oprah)
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:03 PM   #202
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
We will see if David
(little Hill, all by herself)

can slay

Goliath
(that three-headed monster - Obama- Teddy - Oprah)


but little Hill rode into town on the back of a great big dragon named Bill.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:06 PM   #203
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:45 AM
Is that a bagpipe or a kazoo I hear in the background?
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:13 PM   #204
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,255
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98

Neo-cons tend to make this image of Saddam that just because he was a dictator, he had the power of a Soviet Union type of military to invade the world.
And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:17 PM   #205
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
but little Hill rode into town on the back of a great big dragon named Bill.
I have said I expect to vote for either,
in November (even though it is seriously against my own self-interest)

and I am pleased that there seems to be more objective opinions posted lately in this forum, in the recent Dem debate thread for example


In the Primaries, candidates will modify their campaigning and even hold back in an effort not to alienate a good portion of their own base.

You hear Romney saying things like McCain is a good Republican,
just not a conservative. etc.


Obama's main strength in this primary, claiming he was always against the war,
can quickly dismantle him in the general election.

The difference between Hillary or Obama as the nominee,
could be as much as 3-5 per cent of popular vote.

More importantly 2-4 States in the electoral college,
and that is the all that really matters.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:18 PM   #206
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 06:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.
He hadn't murdered people in years. And why put U.S. blood and lives at stake, cause the U.S. to be hated and more of a threat from Islamic terrorists, bomb a country, spend 5-100 years there just to remove a guy who killed his own people years ago? He may have killed his own people, but our presence there has caused the whole country to be instable for the last 5 years, killing and injuring probably tens of millions of people, and 4000 of our soldiers, not to mention that half trillion we've spent there. All while not taking care of our own people. So no, it wasn't worth it. And none of you neo-cons really cared about the Iraqis in the first place.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:19 PM   #207
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,692
Local Time: 07:45 PM
Quote:
And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.
They do? Wow, I haven't heard one say that...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:20 PM   #208
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.
Conservatives say liberals say that, when no one did.

Go figure.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:48 PM   #209
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.


if we eliminate people just on the basis of their death count, there'd be a lot of dictators we supported during the Cold War who we would then, by this principle, have to get rid of as well. as well as lots of militia leaders across Africa, and Kim Jong Il.

but they don' t have oil.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:52 PM   #210
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


And liberals say that just because Saddam was an evil tyrant who murdered millions of his own people, he wasn't worth getting rid of.
Don't forget this:

__________________

__________________
ntalwar is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com