Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread IV

I don't know about you, but I don't think I know very many folks that recognize the U.N. as having any legal authority over what they do, or over what the country does to protect us. I feel rather compelled to obey the laws of the county, state, and country where I live, and I do not think any other authority supercedes what authority we have given this country to protect our God given rights and to protect our sovereignty.

okie wrote:

I don't know about you, but I don't think I know very many folks that recognize the U.N. as having any legal authority over what they do, or over what the country does to protect us. I feel rather compelled to obey the laws of the county, state, and country where I live, and I do not think any other authority supercedes what authority we have given this country to protect our God given rights and to protect our sovereignty.

If your country decides to attack another sovereign state over international boundaries and does this without regard to international law, and against the wishes of countries who would normally be considered allies, then I would suggest this should be a matter of some interest and concern even to the people who write here in support of the Uniter.

okie wrote:

I don't know about you, but I don't think I know very many folks that recognize the U.N. as having any legal authority over what they do, or over what the country does to protect us. I feel rather compelled to obey the laws of the county, state, and country where I live, and I do not think any other authority supercedes what authority we have given this country to protect our God given rights and to protect our sovereignty.

If your country decides to attack another sovereign state over international boundaries and does this without regard to international law, and against the wishes of countries who would normally be considered allies, then I would suggest this should be a matter of some interest and concern even to the people who write here in support of the Uniter.

McTag,

You sound a bit self-righteous and shrill to me. In addition, perhaps a result of your hyperinflated state, you have seriously misrepresented the facts.

You do seem to dislike it immensely when someone provides you with facts, George. Misrepresenting the facts seems largely to be your purview

The fact us that Iraq was invaded by the United States, the United Kingdom ("your country", I believe), Spain, Poland, and many others. This was done with the active aid and support of Kuwait, and the major Persian Gulf littoral states.

This illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, Iraq, was aided by a fantastic set of lies, fantastic even by the standards of the USA. How convenient that you forgot to mention this. Other than the two world wars, has there been any conflict the USA has been ivolved in that was not precipitated by lies?

I'm sure that there was a great deal of nefarious arm twisting also. Spain quickly came to her senses. You haven't, George. Your unthinking "just salute and tenaciously hold to the stupidity that this war is" attitude is really too much for a supposedly educated person.

The supposed violation of international law is a chimera. Some, of course believe this to be the case, but this is not the generally accepted view of sovereign powers, including the government of "your country". If the intervention in Iraq was a violation of international law then so were the recent French intervention in Ivory Coast and the initial NATO intervention in Bosnia.

The sole reason that many of your presidents, yes, and the leaders of many western nations have not been convicted in war crimes trials is that you, and they have been in the fortunate position of being one of the strong; not the righteous just the strong.

As we all unfortunately know, for the grief and death that it has caused to many, that is now coming back to haunt you and other western nations.

The "against the wishes of countries who would normally be considered allies" bit was amusing. Perhaps you are referring to France. The truth is that since their withdrawl from the NATO military alliance decades ago, the United States never assumed France would be our ally in anything short of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. There were episodes of cooperation in the Middle East and even the Indian Ocean, and I participated in several of them. However the normal state throughout the Cold War was watchful suspicion.

You zero in on France with the same noted wisdom of Bill O"Reilly. Rushing to support your illegal activities around the globe is hardly the mark of an ally. How many supporters did you have for Reagan's illegal ventures into Nicaragua? For any number of other illegal invasions of numerous countries/terrorist activities aimed at subverting government?

One would think it wise that one who had participated in illegal military adventures would refrain from trumpeting it.

Bookmarked (while wondering while this thread gets restarted so often when older, longer ones don't.)

McTag wrote:

okie wrote:

I don't know about you, but I don't think I know very many folks that recognize the U.N. as having any legal authority over what they do, or over what the country does to protect us. I feel rather compelled to obey the laws of the county, state, and country where I live, and I do not think any other authority supercedes what authority we have given this country to protect our God given rights and to protect our sovereignty.

If your country decides to attack another sovereign state over international boundaries and does this without regard to international law, and against the wishes of countries who would normally be considered allies, then I would suggest this should be a matter of some interest and concern even to the people who write here in support of the Uniter.

McTag,

You sound a bit self-righteous and shrill to me.

The fact us that Iraq was invaded by the United States, the United Kingdom ("your country", I believe), Spain, Poland, and many others. This was done with the active aid and support of Kuwait, and the major Persian Gulf littoral states.

I am curious of what the discussions would like if only real die hard bush supporters ever made comments in this (or the other)thread. Wouldn't it be kind of boring anyway with just general agreements between posters?

Bookmarked (while wondering while this thread gets restarted so often when older, longer ones don't.)

Also wondering why the anti-Bush people are so bored and inacpable of starting interesting threads of their own so they wouldn't spend so much time spreading trash in this one.

revel wrote:

I am curious of what the discussions would like if only real die hard bush supporters ever made comments in this (or the other)thread. Wouldn't it be kind of boring anyway with just general agreements between posters?

What an interesting point. Why don't we try it and see?

Foxfyre wrote:

Bookmarked (while wondering while this thread gets restarted so often when older, longer ones don't.)

Also wondering why the anti-Bush people are so bored and inacpable of starting interesting threads of their own so they wouldn't spend so much time spreading trash in this one.

I'm wondering the same, Foxy.

I am interested in actually discussing stuff and not oneupmanship or just generally trashing something or somebody. I think that's pretty much the case with most--not all--Conservatives who post on A2K.