We do not answer to the UN nor should we

The UN is anti American
There is such a thing as International Law. Iraq had done NOTHING to the United States that justified invading Iraq! They had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Even if the had WMD that did not justify attacking them. Many countries have WMD including nuclear weapons. We did not invade them.

what about their attacking our fighters


and don't tell me that they only attacked our fighters becouse they were over iraq in the no fly zone

that was one of the conditions to end the other war

"what about their attacking our fighters "

That was because our fighters were flying over Iraq. How did that create such a danger to the U.S. that we had to invade Iraq. If Bush had said to Congress we must invade Iraq because they are shooting at our fighters when we fly over Iraq the answer would have been NO!!! I do not recall a single plane being lost while enforcing the No Fly Zone!

i said that they were there as a condition of us not killing saddam the first time




so

when your attacked you respond you don't wait until someone dies first

Reply By: drmiler Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 Bush and Cheney are GOOD at sending other people’s children into harms way for no justified reason but they did not risk their lives when it was their time to serve No worse than Clinton. And please try to think "before" you answer. Your usual response would be "but he never set our troops in harms way for no reason". That would be pure BS and you and I both know it. Or have you already forgotten "Black Hawk down"? Which was based on true events during 1993! Because Somalia was definitely no threat to the US. Lets compare-- Clinton was acting as part of UN supported action and Bush was not. The UN did not sanction the invasion of Iraq despite the fact Bush tried to get their concurrence. Now let’s look at the impact how many Americans were killed and Injured from Clinton compared with Bush? Better think before you answer. How much money did the Clinton actions cost compared with Bush. Better think VERY hard about this one. What is the reaction of the world to the action of Clinton compared with the actions of Bush in Iraq? That will not require any thought! You are so full of BS. You try the same thing every time YOUR BOY is shown to be WRONG-- You want to attack Clinton. Bush is the president and the current state of affairs is because of GWB not CLINTON!!!!!

According to you fool it doesn't matter! Somalia was NO direct threat to the US. Also according to YOU...we are not the enforcement arm of the UN. Who cares about the reactions of the world. The only time we're any good for them to recognize is when they have a MAJOR catastrophe!

You also seem to forget a very salient point here. Iraq (Saddam) had violated the treaty "THEY" signed after Kuwait. We may not have had UN approval. But then we really didn't need it, we had International LAW backing up the US! Now talk your way out of that one. This one I can prove with no problem.

That is not the issue. The issue is did Bush act within international law when he invaded Iraq? The answer is NO. The UN did not authorize the invasion, we were not attacked by Iraq and we were in no danger from Iraq.

The answer is a resounding "HELL YES"! Would you like me to list all the sections of the Kuwaiti peace treaty that Saddam violated?

What were exaggerated were the Bush claims of the types and amounts of WMD. The truth is there was NO WMD except for some old gas filled Artillery shells that posed NO danger unless someone invaded Iraq! I did not lie about the WMD or anything else. It was Bush and Cheney that lied about the danger Saddam posed to this country.

I see you conveniently forgot about the 500 tons of yellowcake that was found.

BAGHDAD - Thousands of U.S. and Iraqi troops fanned out across the fields of southern Iraq in scorching temperatures Thursday as the military said it remained determined to find two missing U.S. soldiers after the body of a third was pulled from a river.

In addition 9 More Americans were killed yesterday and another 100 Iraqi’s were killed and 120 injured in attacks in Iraq. This surge is NOT WORKING GEORGE!!!!!

When you’re attacked you respond you don't wait until someone dies first

WE WERE NOT attacked by Saddam. He did not have the capability to attack anyone and the Pentagon was aware of that from the assessment they made of Saddam's military capability in 2002. That assessment was proven correct when we were able to defeat the Iraqi Military is a few weeks. WE WERE NOT IN DANGER FROM IRAQ!!!!!!! IT WAS ALL A LIE!!!!!!

drmiler

I see you conveniently forgot about the 500 tons of yellowcake that was found.

First that yellowcake you are talking about was NOT the material Bush claimed Iraq tried to purchase in Africa. Ambassador Wilson was correct in the report he made after visiting Africa. The CIA Director told Bush face to face in October 2001 that story was NOT true and that was removed from a speech Cheney wanted to make. Then Bush turned around and put that same LIE into his State of the Union Speech in January 2002.

Yellow cake is not even close to a weapon. Saddam did not have the technology and process to do anything with any Yellow Cake he obtained earlier. AS I SAID the United States was in NO DANGER from Iraq in 2002-2003. Bush and Cheney LIED invaded Iraq that has resulted in a Civil War and the establishment of al Qaeda in Iraq. Now we have NO GOOD OPTIONS and every day more and more of our brave military die and are injured in a NO WIN Civil War BUSH created.

When was your last visit to Iraq?  I see you get all your opinions from the media.

“When was your last visit to Iraq? I see you get all your opinions from the media.”

I get my information from the reports of the attacks, dead and injured. Are you saying these reports, which are confirmed by OUR military, are not correct? What is your Proof if you claim these reports are not correct?

Again you do NOT want to admit what we are doing in Iraq IS NOT WORKING. I can not wait for the BS that will result in September when the Military reports that the violence is as bad or worse then before this last Surge. Do not forget this is the THIRD time we tried a SURGE. Bush claims this is a NEW tactic. NO it is the same tactic we used unsuccessfully in the past! We just have a NEW 4 star General in command!

I didn't say they were incorrect, I asked if you have been on the ground in Iraq to get the full perspective.  All you do is read the headlines and nothing else.  You are completely one-sided in your views, do you disagree?




Wow col.  It almost seems like you are excited and you will be disappointed if that doesn't happen. 

All you do is read the headlines and nothing else. You are completely one-sided in your views, do you disagree?

I read the stories and reports published by the various news organizations and DoD. Since you are admitting the reports of the continued violence including the dead and injured is correct, you are agreeing that the Surge is NOT working!
Wow col. It almost seems like you are excited and you will be disappointed if that doesn't happen.

No I will be saddened that we have continued to stubbornly follow a policy that has proven to be ineffective in the past and that has resulted in many more dead and injured for NOTHING!

LOL.  One news report doesn't guage the entire mission col.




I stand by my original statement.

IslandDog

“. One news report doesn't guage the entire mission col”.

BETTER LOOK AGAIN. EVERY NEWS REPORT says the violence is as bad as ever.



“I stand by my original statement.”

ALL THAT DOES IS SHOW THAT YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

LMAO!  Yeah col, because the media is objective and shows both sides of the story.  You are hillarious.




Do you have anything better than insults col?  I mean seriously, are you not confident enough in your arguement that you have to result to insults because you are being shown wrong again?

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2007
BETTER LOOK AGAIN. EVERY NEWS REPORT says the violence is as bad as ever.


LMAO! Yeah col, because the media is objective and shows both sides of the story. You are hillarious.



ALL THAT DOES IS SHOW THAT YOU ARE AN IDIOT!


Do you have anything better than insults col? I mean seriously, are you not confident enough in your argument that you have to result to insults because you are being shown wrong again?



YOU are in total denial Just like Bush. You deserve each other.

Thanks for proving me right col. 

IslandDog


YOU are in total denial Just like Bush. You deserve each other.

LOL.  Keep it up col, this is great. 

first you say that we were attacked by saddam although he didn't hit anything




and then you say





so which is it did he or did he not attack us

and if you say he didn't then who attacked our fighters for 8 years

Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2007

first you say that we were attacked by saddam although he didn't hit anything



what about their attacking our fighters "


When a country fires on aircraft flying over their country it is not an attack it is defending their country If Cuba were to fly attack aircraft over Florida we would shoot at them we would not be attacking Cuba by shooting at their air craft.

You are NUTS! We did not invade Iraq because they shot at our aircraft enforcing the no fly zone over Iraq!

Democrats said Iraq was a threat.  That's good enough because democrats never lie, right col?

Posted: Friday, May 25, 2007
Democrats said Iraq was a threat. That's good enough because democrats never lie, right col?

Since Most people on this Blog Side including you are always saying the democrats are always wrong, then you statement above does not make sense.

It was NOT Clinton that went to war and enabled a Civil War to develop in Iraq. That was Bush!

Operation Desert Fox
Somalia

The list can go on and on.....

However, as I said, democrats said Iraq was a threat and they had WMD's, so since democrats are never wrong and they never lie......well you know the rest.