Why is american getting away with all of the crimes it is commiting???

If we commit so many war time crimes why isnt any one doing any thing about it. We attacked without proof of weapons. We allowed humilating pictures of pow's to be taken by the press. We also used napalm.

Does bush think that the law applies to every country but the us. If he does he is wrong. That is the whole reason i am aggainst this war. If we did the war without breaking any laws then i would be fine, but we are being hypocrits. We are attacking iraq because they have weapons they are not supposed to have, but we attack them with napalm whcih we are not supposed to use. How can we get this info into a major news paper???

Why is american getting away with all of the crimes it is commiting???

because America is the "Home of the Free and brave"
because America is the "Holiest country of the entire world"

but the main reason is because we're America, we can get away with 600 years of murder, theft, oppression, and the whole works without being caught.

You are right ilovepizza.

This war is WRONG!

Bush has become a war criminal for ordering the invasion of Iraq, the continuous bombing of Bahgdad with the killing (murder) of innocent people.

Yes the US has weapons of mass destruction (and they have already deployed them in this war with the bunker buster bombs and not to mention others secret weapons we do not know about yet), but they are excused because they are the US. The bully of the block!

I can't believe that everybody else is watching what America is doing and no one is doing anything about the slaughter, cold murder of Iraqi civilians, not to count the deaths of military personnel in the process.

This is just the beginning. Basra already does not have water and soon there will be no food. They are going to die from starvation and if they escape to the desert, the desert will kill them or get shot by some US plane.

It is funny, first the US miltitary blast their way into Iraq, destroy property, kill people and then you see them distributing humanitarian support to help the people.

What an hypocrisy? Why did you start hell in the first place?

This is the most illegal war of them all. The US had no support for it from the rest of the world, they virtually disregarded the UN and could say like spitting in their face.

The US expects the UN to provide post war support. I like to say, you (the US) started it, you fix, you patch it at your own cost!

This war will have repercussions for many years to come even if they win, because the US, Bush would have earned the hatred of the people of the Middle East and the antiamerican feeling that is getting profiled around the rest of the world.

The US are still in time to fix it. Just stop the war. It is as quick as giving an order. No , you won't be judged for pulling out (this is the best you could do), but you will be if you keep it up.

That's what i've been trying to tell you people about bush. But people are saying things like"this bush bashing is getting old"

Here's my take:

In this spectrum, EWC represents "Extreme War Crimes" put forth by conspiracists and alternate media, the NWC represents "No War Crimes" put forth by the likes of the Bush adminsitration.

[EWC]------------------------------|------------------------------[NWC]

The asterik (*) represents where I believe the truth lies in all of history:

[EWC]------------------------------|------*-----------------------[NWC]

Meaning we, on the whole, are somewhere more than median when comparing us to all the countries of the world.

In the early 100 years of our history, this is where I believe our "score" might settle:

[EWC]------------------------*-----|------------------------------[NWC]

We've had some ugly moments in the founding of this country. But that isn't a surprise, Liberty comes at a price few are willing to pay.


Today, I fear we are returning to a less-than-median "score" if one were to score such a thing. How did this happen? The UN failed us, and the UN failed the world. What are categorized as "war crimes" or going against "international law" are the direct results of the failure of the UN to establish what it was charted to maintain, peace through discussion.

While I'm somewhat against the "war", I'm in favor of a military action to remove Saddam. Events have moved into the direction of no other choice. We have had a hand in helping to establish the "international law" we are now ignoring. The repercussions of this will be deep and lengthy. I fear this war against Iraq by the USA is the first step in a downward trend diminishing the USA's strength, influence, and power.

The causes or two-fold. One, as I mentioned, I believe is the UN, the other is the current administration. Never before have we had an administration who is so inept at diplomacy. Combine this with an audacious unilateral arrogance and we have the building of serious, long-standing problems.

Just my .02 portion of the discussion.

Pretty much sums it up...

You'll have to excuse Ilmatic, EVERYTHING is all related to the MAN supposedly stealing everything from the blacks...

::adds Gazrok to the Illmatic67 fan club on ats.com::

Everyone is welcome to join, the fan club seems to be growing quickly, They're 4 members strong:

Thomas Crowne (CEO & Founder)
ultra_phoenix (President)
BeLLaTrIx
Gazrok

[Edited on 3-29-2003 by Illmatic67]

ROFL!



This is good. We can disagree, but still have fun doing it.


What kind of newsletter does the club publish?

Originally posted by William
...
While I'm somewhat against the "war", I'm in favor of a military action to remove Saddam. Events have moved into the direction of no other choice.
...

Why?
Sure, Saddam is a dictator, that is true.
Sure, Saddam murdered his own people, that is true.
but also...
Sure, Irak was the most liberal countries in that region of the world, compared with the countries surrounding it, the one with 'most freedom'.
Sure, Pakistan has a dictator as well, but as he aided USA to provide bases to attack Afghanisthan...

Then, why so much hate against Saddam? There are a lot of dictatorships and fundamentalism governments that were better candidates to be overthrown first...

There should be another reason other than 'liberating the people of Irak' for going to war, don't you think?

[Edited on 2003-3-29 by MakodFilu]

Well, MakodFilu, someone has sold you a "bill of goods" on Iraq.

Indeed, by "appearances" Iraq seems progressive. However, Saddam is a proven horrific dictator... there's not point in arguing this.

Also, if you recall history, Iraq invaded Kuwait, destroyed much of its cities, attempted to destroy its money-making resources (oil wells), and required a brief but intense battle to remove. As we led the coalition to drive Iraq out, and deep into thier desert, we stopped to accept unconditional terms of cease fire which included the elimination of offensive weapons. Subsequent UN resolutions attempted to keep Iraq unable to attack neighbors.

All attempts have failed. What else do you believe should be attempted at this point?

We have all decided america is a total hypocracy and that what they are doing are major war crimes, but we still need a way to get this into the news. We need to make this clear to the people so the war can stop, or so at least a lot of people will see the crimes america is commiting.

ilovepizza, you are spewing anti-Americanism that is meaningless and without any legal foundation. Your knowledge of international law and the Laws of Nations is so woefully lacking that to argue against you would drag your opponent into the muck of your level.
Stupidity, while not dangerous in safe times, can cause many deaths and much destruction in the days in which we no find ourselves.

William, you seem to not be towing the national line.

Are you not aware of what Mr. Whitley said? Have you forgotten? While everyone is not aware, you are. I suggest you think of national security, the security of our families, before you give any ammo to the enemy. We are bending over backward to spare every civilian life we can. Your little graph should place us in the sainthood category.

If you are soo noliagble in international law then tell me the law that gave us the right to attack. Also what about pictures of pows appering in articles, the army has to prevent press or any person from taking pictures of pow's, so they are not shown in a humiliating way. I cant find the link but it is in a post. We are doing things that go against international law. Why are you backing it up?

Originally posted by ilovepizza
We have all decided america is a total hypocracy and that what they are doing are major war crimes.

Where was I for this vote? Speak for yourself pizza.

Thomas, you know damn well what I think of all that.

Check your U2U, I won't sully this thread with your madness.

Originally posted by ilovepizza
If you are soo noliagble in international law then tell me the law that gave us the right to attack.

While we may not have an absolute right to invade Iraq under strict international law, we are a founding member of the body that created such laws, and are operating under what we believe to be strict, as-written, interpretation of resolution 1441.

Under international law a nation has the right to defend itself. Hussein has called for Holy War against America and has actively aided in this war by training and funding terrorists who are seen in the middle east as warriors. This gives us the right to defend ourselves, including trouncing Hussein.

I'm not goping to spoon feed you. If you have the desire for knowledge, you spend a few years reseaching. Things that are handed to you are not appreciated. Look at how you regard liberty.

William, I suggest you take care. Attitude is as indicative of the heart as words, and quoting a U.N. resolution does not indicate loyalty to the nation that protects you.

Thomas, you need to unwind your right-wing some, it's a little too tight this evening.

I've been in and out of these issues, politics, ethics, conspiracies, and government responsiblities since before you could pronounce such words. I'll not be needing any reminders from you nor your new happy little friends about what is, and what is not appropriate loyalist behavior.

Now shut down your computer and go toss some suds down your gullet.

No need to turn off the computer as it does not interfere with the phone line.

The beer goes without saying. My new beer of choice, Samuel Adams.