Defending the Truth
Articles | Interviews | Politicians | Groups | Arcade | Experience | Donate
  Defending the Truth > Debate Politics > Militaries and War

Militaries and War Debate and discuss global militaries, past and present wars including the war on terror.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-29-2005, 08:27 PM   #21 (permalink)
Citizen
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 78
Points: 2,420, Level: 29
Points: 2,420, Level: 29 Points: 2,420, Level: 29 Points: 2,420, Level: 29
Level up: 80%, 30 Points needed
Level up: 80% Level up: 80% Level up: 80%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
srl119 is offline
Reply With Quote
Re: White Phosphorous in Fallujah -- a War Crime?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevusa
Quote:
Originally Posted by tadpole256
Quote:
Originally Posted by srl119
First let me say if our country intentionally used chemical or biological components purely as weapons and was not a reaction of nature mixed with regular weapons, and Bush knew this, he should not only be impeached but in the same jail cell as Hussein. I have a question; can this mixture be produced naturally? Like known to be in soil or wherever? Also, firecrackers can cause burns on a person, you can’t tell by pictures. Do we know for sure what caused the burns? I couldn’t find these answers in that blog, it was very vague.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug
White Phosphorous, the miracle chemical that can "melt flesh" without harming clothing?

You knew it was leftist moonbat horsefeathers, now read why:

http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_d...on_exclus.html

Doug
White Phosporus rounds do not constitute biological or chemical weaponry. White phosphorus is a naturally occuring substance, although I do not know where it is found. It is a metal. What makes it so dangerous is that it is a burning metal (Class 'D' Fire). A Class 'D' Fire produces it's own oxygen, and therefore can only be effectively put out by being allowed to burn out. In the case of WP, it burns very rapidly.

If it can be used in such a hideous way why not just ban it?
I'm not sure you understand a weapon by definition is dangerous and can inflict hideous damage. Napalm, freaking gunpowder. It amazes me people are surprised when people are killed in a war. It seems we are ok with going to war if our guys get back relatively unharmed, but once we take losses we want to point fingers and pull out. What did congress think was going to happen when they said Bush could go to war with iraq?
Sponsored Links
Old 12-13-2005, 08:18 PM   #22 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyreay
Just for the record, Bush went to war before he was actually told he could.
With the UN against it.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:18 PM   #23 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebraskaboy
What is with the left adn bring up the UN? We are not part of the UN nor should we be. Why do you liberals insist on giving up powers to those corrupt assholes?
Old 12-13-2005, 08:21 PM   #24 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevusa
The pot calling the kettle black.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:21 PM   #25 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyreay
I stand corrected on the congress thing, I remembered the article
from csmonitor.com and it was written before they asked congress. My bad.
As for us liberals mentioning the U.N. well guess why. Bush went in there because Iraq wouldn't let U. N. INSPECTORS in. At that time we were working closely with them, And they said they were doubtful concerning the evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction. Well Bush told them He was sure there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we were going in anyway. An excuse to grab oil and appropriate money and get him and his buddies rich. No Weapons. Just big bucks.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:22 PM   #26 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by srl119
I also don’t remember the U.N. being on the United States presidential ballot last year. Until then the president and congress runs this country. Go run kosovo. If you screw with this country we don’t have to ask anyone for permission to defend ourselves. Saddam didn’t leave a paper trail dealing with al Qaeda but there's no doubt he was. Christ there was a hesbola camp in North western Iraq. The only people who are killing our troops in Iraq are the very minority sunni's because they were getting rich off sadaams billions while the majority shiites were starving and being murdered in mass. Weapons of mass destruction that can kill millions can be put in a test tube the size of a pencil. Just because we couldn’t find that test tube in a country the size of California doesn’t mean its not there, or moved.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:23 PM   #27 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by srl119
Those inspectors were in there for 10 years. Make a decision or shut up. All they did was send a couple people in there looking in palaces just to keep the US happy, meanwhile sadaam was ripping us off while funneling money to terrorist groups. It was a joke and he's gone. Now those groups know Bush wont just lob some cruise missiles in an aspirin factory, he will kick butt and take names. They will think twice about screwing with us again. I could care less about technicalities; all I know is my family is safe. And yes, I have a very close person to me in the marines and going back to Iraq soon.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:23 PM   #28 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyreay
I might agree with some of what your saying, if it wasn't for the fact that most of the terrorist were NOT
Iraqi. They were Saudi Arabian and we went in to Iraqi, why? Because the royal familiy in Saudi Arabia is up Bush's ass and pays him off big. Bush couldn't go in there or He be risking his pay offs and oil shipments. Bush and Co. planned to go into Iraq before 9/11 and the only reason we haven't gone into in Syria and Iran to take thier oil is because the majority the American People know Bush is a dick and he just can't get away with it right now.
Oh, and do you honestly think that if there were weapons like that in Iraq, the terrorist (who flocked to Iraq once we presented ourselfs as a target there) would still be hanging on to them? Let's see, suicide bombers, weapons of mass destruction. This is not hard to add up. They would be using them if they had them. The U.N. is the one that said, 10 years ago, that there were no more weapons like that in Iraq. George SR. pulled us out of there. The U.N. made sound decisions based on facts. They told us going back in was not right because of the evidence at the time. Sorry, They were right, George was Wrong. I think the fat end of that funnel you mentioned was in Saudi Arabia. The govenment would have you believe Saddam was ripping us off, What was he doing, Not sharing thier oil with us? I don't se George justifying any of his claims with with evidence. Don't get me wrong, saddam is a total asshole and needed to be taken out of there but atleast we could have just been honest about it from the start.
Sound like the only flaw in the decision making process lies with the U.S. government, Huh?
I too had someone close to me go into Iraq with the Marine recon group at the onset of this war and luckily He made it out of there alive. This has nothing to do with the facts at hand. Our eyes are clouded by misinformation put out by this administation. Wipe your eyes.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:24 PM   #29 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teethandclaws
In support of tyreay, maybe we should be able to vote on whether or not we are involved in the U.N. If we are involved in the process of the U.N., we would have more information available to us, helping us in our decision of determining whether or not we should go to war. In addition, we would have a better barometer of the whole world situation, rather than the limited views of those in our own country.
I don't mean we should base our decisions solely based on what the U.N. has to say. We are an independent nation and ultimately ours is the final decision. But we should not close ourselves off from the rest of the world. War is not the only issue we as a nation need to be focusing on. Calling a group of people who are basically peaceful assholes is counterproductive.
As for Saudi Arabia's place in all of this, yes they do have some responsibility for the events of 9/11. They probably knew beforehand that some of their people were disgruntled and were being provoked to violence, on a massive scale, and were developing enough wealth and power and organization to carry out this violence. The Saudi's harbored these terrorists, the one's responsible for 9/11.
Perhaps we should freeze the assets of the Saudi's here in the United States until we are able to fully investigate their role in these events. I'm not talking about the little people who have come here seeking asylum, I'm talking about the oil magnates, etc. Some of whom just use our economy having nothing to do with a life here or with our lifestyle. The ones that pay 'us' off to keep us silent about them.
In addition to this, I remember stories of American children being kidnapped and forced into marraiges with Saudi Arabian men, that would be considered illegal, as well they should be, here in the U.S. What have we done about this? This is nothing short of legalized child molestation and rape.
They may have made some minor improvements in their human rights policies, very minor when applied to women and children, the ones that need the most protection, and we give them a huge pat on the back. We suck up to these rich assholes, forming an alliance with them. I think we need to make better choices on who we choose to call our friends.
That a shit-head Iraqi dictator got taken down, I do not at all regret. I think we are seeing now that the people of Iraq are simply not ready to run their own country. They are still very divided, and no matter what happens, their county will not be free, a true democracy.
Sure, we saw lots of women out there voting. Were they equipped with enough information about the people they were voting for to make an informed decision about how their lives would be impacted? Probably not.
Were their votes influenced by the men who control their lives, probably.
(Off topic, look who gained quite a bit of power in Egypt. The muslim brotherhood. Do you think that 25% of women voted for this extremist, anti-woman group without coercion from the men in control of their lives? Not if they have the least little clue about what they're voting for.)
I have watched what has been said regarding this war since before it started. Our reasons have changed over the course of this war, from weapons of mass destruction, to changing the political structure of Iraq,to dealing with the Iraqi insurgents, to alleged Sadaam-al qaeda ties, to the terrorists who carry out suicide bombings from numerous extemist muslim groups who have thronged to Iraq since this war began.
We've got the big guns and that gives us the right, yet still this war is being fought. We have indulged in behavior during this war, including torture and degradation, that shames many Americans. It seems to me we are at a loss as to what to do and what the right thing to do is, but we keep on doing what we've been doing, because to do nothing would show the world we are weak.
In elementary school we are taught that violence is not the way to solve problems. We are called strong and wise as children if we turn the other cheek and talk out our differences. Violence begets violence.
We want to think of our wars as being non-violent, the people who are killed as targets, like an arrow being launched into a target. The truth is war causes human suffering and death. Suffering that can last decades beyond the end of the violence, affecting the lives of many.
What causes insurgents? Are they all Sadaam loyalists? No. Some have just been victim to the violence and through feelings of hopelessness, have been drawn to retaliate in violence. Insurgents are Iraqi's who live in Iraq. Iraq is their home, they don't want us in their home.
Insurgency is based on revenge, which may be a childish reaction, but is that not how our war got started in the first place?
We were attacked and our people were killed. Many innocent people. The ones who physically attacked us are dead. They died when the planes they were flying blew up. Were any of the people associated with this attack from the Iraqi government? We have found that answer to be no.
Old 12-13-2005, 08:25 PM   #30 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,517
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevusa
HEAR HEAR!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 AM.


 Top Political Sites
Poltical Topsites