sguy78 said:
megaman79 said:
sguy78 said:
megaman79 said:
sguy78 said:
I just find it funny that you can be so absolutely positive there were no WMD's in Iraq. We gave them two weeks of notice, and we have photos of numerous large trucks moving in the direction of Syria during said two weeks. Iran is obviously develpoing nuclear materials, and has said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth. The dictatorship just stole another election where the opposition lost his own town. Seems like a perfectly stable country to have nuclear weapons. How long can you stick your head in the sand while maniacle dictator stomp on their people? I bet you would have just gone along with the flow when Hitler stormed Poland too, huh?
|
Quoting for lulz.
Are you serious? Blair just testified 2 weeks ago and said "there was NO IMMINENT THREAT".
|
Yeah because it's so funny you deal only with absolutes. Only you can be right on every issue. When you decide to look at said pictures, do what you must always do, and just close your eyes. WMD's were one of numerous reasons the U.N. had to attack Saddam's Regime under the Peace Treaty following the Iraq War. It would have been under the "Umbrella" of unity if France hadn't veto'd it. Gee, they didn't happen to be covering up a certain Oil For Food program, were they? Stop acting like you are coming from some moral high ground, when a tyrant who used chemical weapons on women and children has been removed. Ever look at the mass graves of people that were found in Iraq, that were obvious assasinations? Wasn't one of the main purposes of the U.N. to stand in the way of attrocities such as those perpetrated during WW2?
|
Do you know anything about UN International Law? I studied it for a year. Do you know anything about why France didn't agree to support the invasion? No, you dont. Do you know about the highway of death? Not likely.
Do you know about the human rights abuses in Darfur, and the UN's inaction? Do you know about the first Iraq War, you know the one that was ACTUALLY about protecting a sovereign state, instead of invasion for no reason at all?
Again, lulz to your ignorance. Its funny stuff.
|
Why don't you start without the typical liberal practice of lashing out and insulting people that don't agree with you? Maybe you should wake up and realize France was skimming some money off the top pal. "If you don't agree with me you're an ignorant moron!" Waaaaaahhhh!!!!!!
|
I said you were ignorant about UN International law. I did not call you a moron. Clearly, and this is even after i provided a link which explains why you were wrong about UN support, you can not even acknowledge this.
Still waiting for that one reason why Saddam deserved a premeditated and illegal (not my quote, the UN's) invasion. Let me know when you found it, because atleast these guys http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=101602&page=4&str=521761088#48 have something to offer.
“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.
Essay Pro