| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"techie" |
| Date: |
04 Sep 2003 07:26:00 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:36:55 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
"Eyeball Kid" <marjian@nospam.wvi.com> wrote in message
news:040920031631228881%marjian@nospam.wvi.com...
In article <GhC5b.5257$DG6.1706@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, ehollo
<ehollo@verizon.net> wrote:
Still no discovery of our stated rationale for war.
Uranium, anyone?
You don't get it, do you?
You're not supposed to remember that WMDs were the major reason for the
invasion.
Think again, Demmie.
WMD's are only PART of the reason why we went to war against the Muslim
Terrorists in Iraq.
But the WMD's that Iraq possessed are certainly ONE of the major reasons,
yes.
All the other reasons that were given at the time to justify the war
depend on their existence. Without WMD's, Saddam is no threat to the
US.
.
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 07:40:48 PM |
|
|
"techie" <none@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:h0mflv8n55ql0gnmcu0j3025jt6utp4389@4ax.com...
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:36:55 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
"Eyeball Kid" <marjian@nospam.wvi.com> wrote in message
news:040920031631228881%marjian@nospam.wvi.com...
In article <GhC5b.5257$DG6.1706@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, ehollo
<ehollo@verizon.net> wrote:
Still no discovery of our stated rationale for war.
Uranium, anyone?
You don't get it, do you?
You're not supposed to remember that WMDs were the major reason for the
invasion.
Think again, Demmie.
WMD's are only PART of the reason why we went to war against the Muslim
Terrorists in Iraq.
But the WMD's that Iraq possessed are certainly ONE of the major reasons,
yes.
All the other reasons that were given at the time to justify the war
depend on their existence. Without WMD's, Saddam is no threat to the
US.
And what is the evidence that the WMD's no longer exist?? That was the
problem, you see - the UN ORDERED Iraq to produce that evidence, but Iraq
FAILED to do so. Thus Iraq became in violation of UN Resolution 1441, and
thus the UN authorized the use of American force against Iraq.
It's like you Demmies don't pay attention to ANY of the UN Resolutions,
techie. Why? Are Democrats such as you REALLY that mentally dull,
techie??
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
05 Sep 2003 10:58:48 AM |
|
|
In alt.politics.democrats Barbara Walker <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
And what is the evidence that the WMD's no longer exist?? That was the
problem, you see - the UN ORDERED Iraq to produce that evidence, but Iraq
FAILED to do so. Thus Iraq became in violation of UN Resolution 1441, and
Yes, true.
thus the UN authorized the use of American force against Iraq.
No, not true.
1 out of 2. At least your percentage is improving.
The UN was quite opposed to the use of force in Iraq when we invaded.
They might not have been opposed forever, but they clearly wanted to
give the inspections a chance to work. The clear majority at the UN
had this strange notion that war should be a last resort.
So you like the UN well enough to be upset over the violation of UN
Resolution 1441, but don't like them well enough to let them decide
how to deal with a violation of their own resolution? Don't suppose
that's a little hypocritical, do you?
--
That's News To Me!
newstome@comcast.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spammeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
05 Sep 2003 11:11:25 PM |
|
|
Barbara Walker wrote:
No, the UN had already authorized the use of American force. See UN
Resolution 1441.
Actually it doesn't, Babs.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,69380,00.html
--
"Stupidity's the deliberate cultivation of ignorance."
-- William Gladdis
Tired of junk email??? Fight back! Visit http://www.craigbanks.us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
06 Sep 2003 05:53:08 AM |
|
|
"Spammeister" <gotoreplyto@below.net> wrote in message
news:pI2cndlky_FswsSiXTWJhA@comcast.com...
Barbara Walker wrote:
No, the UN had already authorized the use of American force. See UN
Resolution 1441.
Actually it doesn't, Babs.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,69380,00.html
Actually, it does. Thanks for the link, BTW.
"UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into and out
of Iraq" - that means foreign nationals can legally invade Iraq
"UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and landing
of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned
reconnaissance vehicles" - that means foreign nationals can legally overfly
Iraq, can land fighter jets in Iraq, can use Iraq air strips to launch
helicopter gunships, whatever
"Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, unimpeded,
unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, including
underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of
transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded,
unrestricted, and private access to all officials and other persons whom
UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the mode or location of UNMOVIC's
or the IAEA's choice pursuant to any aspect of their mandates" - this
condition of UN14441 Iraq violated
"Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by
Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply
with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall
constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be
reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and
12 below" - this condition of UN1441 Iraq violated
THEREFORE Iraq was in material breach of UN1441. With me so far?
Good. So Iraq was in breach of UN1441. Furthermore, Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the security of the United Nations, a sovereign nation.
The United States is a member state of the UN. The United States does NOT
have to obtain the permission of the UN in order to take action against
immediate threats to her security. The United States was a signatory to
UN1441. Iraq was in breach of UN1441. THAT, plus the fact that Iraq
posed an immediate threat to the security of UN member nation United States,
AUTHORIZES the invasion of, and the use of force against, Iraq by the United
States.
Questions?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spammeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
06 Sep 2003 10:18:28 AM |
|
|
Barbara Walker wrote:
"Spammeister" <gotoreplyto@below.net> wrote in message
news:pI2cndlky_FswsSiXTWJhA@comcast.com...
Barbara Walker wrote:
No, the UN had already authorized the use of American force. See UN
Resolution 1441.
Actually it doesn't, Babs.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,69380,00.html
Actually, it does. Thanks for the link, BTW.
Honey, you have to be the dumbest ***** in all of usenet. Unbelievable.
Even idiot-boy Bush realized he had to go back to UN for another
resolution. He's been throwing a temper tantrum ever since.
"UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into and out
of Iraq" - that means foreign nationals can legally invade Iraq
This moronic reasoning, even if we accept your ridiculous
interpretation, doesn't hold water because what you're saying is UNMOVIC
and IAEA were given permission to 'invade' Iraq, not the 101st Airborne.
"UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and landing
of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned
reconnaissance vehicles" - that means foreign nationals can legally overfly
Iraq, can land fighter jets in Iraq, can use Iraq air strips to launch
helicopter gunships, whatever
The Bushies turning Apaches over to UNMOVIC and IAEA?
"Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, unimpeded,
unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, including
underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of
transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded,
unrestricted, and private access to all officials and other persons whom
UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the mode or location of UNMOVIC's
or the IAEA's choice pursuant to any aspect of their mandates" - this
condition of UN14441 Iraq violated
Bush was whining "material breach" *before* the UN weapons inspectors
arrived in Iraq. But even a drooling Bushie apologist like you realizes
that his acting job was just to grease the skids for a subsequent UN
resolution rubber stamping his invasion.
"Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by
Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply
with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall
constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be
reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and
12 below" - this condition of UN1441 Iraq violated
And the Bushies kept running back to the Security Council and kept
getting rebuffed. They pushed for a vote and lost. The Bushies have
trashed the French ever since and, to a lesser extent, Germany.
Forgetting that Russia, China and even Chile voted against us. Go to
Congress and place an order for Freedom Fries, honey. Feed that starving
brain with some junk food. Maybe you'll get lucky and you can get a side
of Liberty Cabbage.
THEREFORE Iraq was in material breach of UN1441. With me so far?
You grammar is fine. Sentences well formed. Good paragraph structure.
(Probably because most of it quotes the resolution). The content you
added is idiocy. But after reading so much of your tortured Bushie
apologist logic in so many posts it's starting to paint a complete
picture of the fantasy world you live in.
Good. So Iraq was in breach of UN1441. Furthermore, Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the security of the United Nations, a sovereign nation.
The United States is a member state of the UN. The United States does NOT
have to obtain the permission of the UN in order to take action against
immediate threats to her security. The United States was a signatory to
UN1441. Iraq was in breach of UN1441. THAT, plus the fact that Iraq
posed an immediate threat to the security of UN member nation United States,
AUTHORIZES the invasion of, and the use of force against, Iraq by the United
States.
Questions?
Oh, just a couple minor ones.
Like how does requiring UN weapons inspectors unfettered access in Iraq
get translated into foreign troops invading? Like how recon planes and
helicopters get translated into permitting combat helicopters to support
an invasion? Like how the UN is now a "sovereign nation"? Why? Because
it issues its own stamps?
The only thing that holds any water is that we can invade any country,
any time we want to. We're not bound by the UN. But when we act without
their sanction don't play the hypocrite by claiming you're doing it on
their behalf.
--
"Stupidity's the deliberate cultivation of ignorance."
-- William Gladdis
Tired of junk email??? Fight back! Visit http://www.craigbanks.us.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "droopus" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
06 Sep 2003 08:31:24 PM |
|
|
In article <o0j6b.375087$uu5.71777@sccrnsc04>, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
Furthermore, Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the security of the United Nations, a sovereign nation.
[....]
Questions?
Uh, yes please. Show us where in the UN Charter it declares itself a
sovereign nation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
07 Sep 2003 06:54:10 AM |
|
|
"droopus" <droopus714@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:droopus714-0609032131250001@ool-4356724b.dyn.optonline.net...
In article <o0j6b.375087$uu5.71777@sccrnsc04>, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
Furthermore, Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the security of the United Nations, a sovereign
nation.
[....]
Questions?
Uh, yes please. Show us where in the UN Charter it declares itself a
sovereign nation.
Sorry, make that "United States". My error.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Droopus" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
07 Sep 2003 06:08:57 PM |
|
|
banjocat <banjocat@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<pcomlvo9gpgqq8t027k476jdhp1ff3l3rn@4ax.com>...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:54:10 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
"droopus" <droopus714@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:droopus714-0609032131250001@ool-4356724b.dyn.optonline.net...
In article <o0j6b.375087$uu5.71777@sccrnsc04>, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
Furthermore, Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the security of the United Nations, a sovereign
nation.
[....]
Questions?
Uh, yes please. Show us where in the UN Charter it declares itself a
sovereign nation.
Sorry, make that "United States". My error.
Thus the basis of your argument fails.
Nah, much as I find "Barbara" to be the Krispy Kreme of usenet, that
was an honest mistake, and "she" admitted it.
If "she" had defended the statement, I would have come down on "her"
too, but "she" admitted an honest mistake and exhibited contrition.
Let it go. We all make mistakes sometimes.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "techie" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 08:33:01 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:40:48 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
And what is the evidence that the WMD's no longer exist?? That was the
problem, you see - the UN ORDERED Iraq to produce that evidence, but Iraq
FAILED to do so. Thus Iraq became in violation of UN Resolution 1441, and
thus the UN authorized the use of American force against Iraq.
Sorry, it's not up to the UN to provide America's reasons for sending
our soldiers to die. That's Bush's job, and he's failed to produce the
WMD's that he told the American People were there, nor has he
presented any plausible excuse for the weapons to have "disappeared"
if they'd existed before.
Can you say, "Impeachment"?
It's like you Demmies don't pay attention to ANY of the UN Resolutions,
techie. Why? Are Democrats such as you REALLY that mentally dull,
techie??
Dumb or not, I still get to vote. As I've said before I'm a political
moderate who dislikes both major parties about equally, but usually
have to swallow my bile and vote for one or the other. If the
Republicans want that vote they're gonna have to convince me I'd be
better off with them than the Democrats. You've called me names,
you've wasted a few seconds of my leisure time with dumb stupid
arguments that a six-year-old could shoot down in flames, but I have
yet to hear any intelligent reason from you why I should vote
Republican.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 09:06:57 PM |
|
|
"techie" <none@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:bcoflv426569r30l8pcudd0g81ck5bsm8f@4ax.com...
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:40:48 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
And what is the evidence that the WMD's no longer exist?? That was the
problem, you see - the UN ORDERED Iraq to produce that evidence, but Iraq
FAILED to do so. Thus Iraq became in violation of UN Resolution 1441,
and
thus the UN authorized the use of American force against Iraq.
Sorry, it's not up to the UN to provide America's reasons for sending
our soldiers to die.
Most Americans (Democrats excluded, of course) feel 9/11 is sufficient
reason.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spammeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 09:04:53 PM |
|
|
Barbara Walker wrote:
Sorry, it's not up to the UN to provide America's reasons for sending
our soldiers to die.
Most Americans (Democrats excluded, of course) feel 9/11 is sufficient
reason.
What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?
--
"Stupidity's the deliberate cultivation of ignorance."
-- William Gladdis
Tired of junk email??? Fight back! Visit http://www.craigbanks.us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "techie" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 09:05:38 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:04:53 -0400, Spammeister
<gotoreplyto@below.net> wrote:
Barbara Walker wrote:
Sorry, it's not up to the UN to provide America's reasons for sending
our soldiers to die.
Most Americans (Democrats excluded, of course) feel 9/11 is sufficient
reason.
What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?
Nothing. "Barbara" has been straightened out on that a few dozen times
already. He's just trolling.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gogarty" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 09:20:52 PM |
|
|
In article <5dS5b.268847$Oz4.71162@rwcrnsc54>,
says...
Most Americans (Democrats excluded, of course) feel 9/11 is sufficient
reason.
Nope. 9/11 was no reason to attack a country that was minding its own
business. None.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "techie" |
|
| Title: Re: Democrat Party Death Spiral Continues, Unabated |
04 Sep 2003 09:00:38 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 02:06:57 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
"techie" <none@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:bcoflv426569r30l8pcudd0g81ck5bsm8f@4ax.com...
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:40:48 GMT, "Barbara Walker"
<barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
And what is the evidence that the WMD's no longer exist?? That was the
problem, you see - the UN ORDERED Iraq to produce that evidence, but Iraq
FAILED to do so. Thus Iraq became in violation of UN Resolution 1441,
and
thus the UN authorized the use of American force against Iraq.
Sorry, it's not up to the UN to provide America's reasons for sending
our soldiers to die.
Most Americans (Democrats excluded, of course) feel 9/11 is sufficient
reason.
So really now - are you a conservative, or are you just a liberal
trying to make conservatives look bad?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
