name for upcoming war?
#16
speel chekk this fokker!
Charter Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Locust Valley, New York
Posts: 5,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Operation "Set a very bad prescident for countries like North Korea, India and Pakistan. So it now make sit OK for them to make pre-emptive strikes on thier precieved enemies tha may or may not have weapons of mass destruction, which india and pakistan BOTH have and are WILLING to use"
or is that too long and not catchey enough for TV?
That being said its begun and diplomacy failed. Bomb them back to the stone age. And lets see if we can this damn stock market stabailized. At least all teh uncertainty is over and teh upcommgin war taht has been "priced into" everythign for teh passed few months will eb over and we can start making a move to the upside and i can cash in on some purchases.
or is that too long and not catchey enough for TV?
That being said its begun and diplomacy failed. Bomb them back to the stone age. And lets see if we can this damn stock market stabailized. At least all teh uncertainty is over and teh upcommgin war taht has been "priced into" everythign for teh passed few months will eb over and we can start making a move to the upside and i can cash in on some purchases.
__________________
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
#17
speel chekk this fokker!
Charter Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Locust Valley, New York
Posts: 5,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lemme just clairifed my last statement before I get jumped on. Sadam Hussein is a madman and needs to be "taken care of" I just think perhaps a "secret assasination" might be better than a full frontal assaul tha make us loosk like the bad guys beating on eth oppressed iraq's (what a PR job they pulled, insane, meglomaniac, emperialistic madman turned into the empoverished defenseless opressed nation of sufferers)
Once agian to clarify I have no problem with the OBJECTIVES in this war i jsut hitnk the ware isn't needed to achieve them. But its the path we chose so we better hope those checmical biological weapons turn up when its all over.
Once agian to clarify I have no problem with the OBJECTIVES in this war i jsut hitnk the ware isn't needed to achieve them. But its the path we chose so we better hope those checmical biological weapons turn up when its all over.
__________________
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
#18
Pardon me
This is not a "pre emptive strike"
It is a resumption of war, and we have full authority under international law to do so.
Gulf War I Treaty signed by Saddam Hussein in 1991 said that Saddam must give full cooperation to UN and eliminate his arsenal of certain weapons.
HE HAS DONE NEITHER.
Under international law, if you violate a war treaty, war resumes to defend the principles of that treaty.
THIS IS A R E S U M P T I O N OF the 1991 Gulf War
Time to finish the job.
Oh yea, lets not forget 17 UN resolutions and 12 years of trying to figure out how to make Saddam comply without resuming war. The 17th resolution was a unanimous vote (France included) of the UN Security council to use military force if Saddam did not comply.
It is a resumption of war, and we have full authority under international law to do so.
Gulf War I Treaty signed by Saddam Hussein in 1991 said that Saddam must give full cooperation to UN and eliminate his arsenal of certain weapons.
HE HAS DONE NEITHER.
Under international law, if you violate a war treaty, war resumes to defend the principles of that treaty.
THIS IS A R E S U M P T I O N OF the 1991 Gulf War
Time to finish the job.
Oh yea, lets not forget 17 UN resolutions and 12 years of trying to figure out how to make Saddam comply without resuming war. The 17th resolution was a unanimous vote (France included) of the UN Security council to use military force if Saddam did not comply.
#19
I like "Gulf War - Version 1.2".
BTW - I am a lifelong Republican and I grew up in Texas. Nevertheless, I think Bush has f---ed this thing up to no end. But while I disagree with how they ended up in this war, I unquestioningly support out troops, and can't wait to see them kick some A$$.
I'm with Puder -- let's just hope it helps the economy (where the President should have declared war to begin with). uppy:
BTW - I am a lifelong Republican and I grew up in Texas. Nevertheless, I think Bush has f---ed this thing up to no end. But while I disagree with how they ended up in this war, I unquestioningly support out troops, and can't wait to see them kick some A$$.
I'm with Puder -- let's just hope it helps the economy (where the President should have declared war to begin with). uppy:
#20
Registered
Re: Pardon me
Originally posted by at100plus
This is not a "pre emptive strike"
It is a resumption of war, and we have full authority under international law to do so.
Gulf War I Treaty signed by Saddam Hussein in 1991 said that Saddam must give full cooperation to UN and eliminate his arsenal of certain weapons.
HE HAS DONE NEITHER.
Under international law, if you violate a war treaty, war resumes to defend the principles of that treaty.
THIS IS A R E S U M P T I O N OF the 1991 Gulf War
Time to finish the job.
Oh yea, lets not forget 17 UN resolutions and 12 years of trying to figure out how to make Saddam comply without resuming war. The 17th resolution was a unanimous vote (France included) of the UN Security council to use military force if Saddam did not comply.
This is not a "pre emptive strike"
It is a resumption of war, and we have full authority under international law to do so.
Gulf War I Treaty signed by Saddam Hussein in 1991 said that Saddam must give full cooperation to UN and eliminate his arsenal of certain weapons.
HE HAS DONE NEITHER.
Under international law, if you violate a war treaty, war resumes to defend the principles of that treaty.
THIS IS A R E S U M P T I O N OF the 1991 Gulf War
Time to finish the job.
Oh yea, lets not forget 17 UN resolutions and 12 years of trying to figure out how to make Saddam comply without resuming war. The 17th resolution was a unanimous vote (France included) of the UN Security council to use military force if Saddam did not comply.