If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I'm trying to see your point. America is allies with Isreal, same as they are the the UK. They aren't gonna take their nukes away, same as they won't take ours.
not that hard to understand.
The UN doesn't matter, and they found loopholes in it anyway, legality doesn't come in it legally speaking, justificationa nd legitmacy are in the eyes of the beholder, just ask the Kurds what they think.
once again its all down to opinion.
The fact is the US didn't give a toss about human rights in Iraq or whether Saddam had any weapons for as long as he danced to Washington's tune.
Just as it doesn't give a toss about human rights, democracy or freedom anywhere else. If the regime in question can serve a purpose to the US government, all atrocities will be forgiven or even encouraged. And when there isn't a further use for the regime or if it refuses to collaborate with America, then we start seeing crocodile tears about the poor oppresed civilians and all those weapons primed to be launched at us.
And millions of brain-dead sheeple will go with it and support more illegal wars.
It's pathetically sickening.
If you believe that then you have zero recourse to any claim for the rule of law or legitimacy for those claiming to act in the furtherance thereof. Consistency of principle cannot be maintained by pursuing such moral and ethical relativism.
And you'd best review your history concerning the invasion of Kuwait again, dude, your comic book recounting of what was said and done falls fall short of the actualities.
Well I wasn't writing an essay on the Iraq-IRan-kuwait-US conflcit, I am posting on a message board stiney, so forgive the simplistic descriptions.
Unless of course you are actually denying any of it is true.
Do you deny that Saddam was America's ally?
Do you deny we supplied him with weapons and supported him?
Do you deny that we did nothing or even made much of a comment as he was happily gassing people or torturing and killing thousands of his own during the 1980s?
Do you deny that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs and that he was not threat to us or other nations?
I said Sadam was America's ally, read upwards.
Yes we did suport and supply him, read above.
Yes I don't think we made any real comments, but then agin you'd have to go back and check that.
No I think he was a threat and the WMD issue has not been resolved.
not that I think anyone accpets that on here, but then again, they have already made up their mind.
So if the entire world, from international observers to the UN to the US government itself now accepts there were no WMDs, why do you think any different?
Seems like Bush has made his mind up too
See, he says it was faulty intelligence maaaan!
What most of us knew long ago was that Bush and Blair had doctored the intelligence to provide an alibi for the visitation of death upon the Iraqi people.
Still, he's going to make the intelligence agencies pay for allowing him to doctor their reports.
Which is quite a neat trick, no?
:rolleyes:
Then again, you seem to prefer to cling to the PR of rabid ideologues and repeatedly exposed liars than face the darker truth of corruption and powermongering at the heart of US policymaking.
The question of HOW much Blair and Bush were invloved in gettin the reporst to say what they did is in question because it hasn't yet been proven.
FDid they do it direct or was the agnecies just trying to please the Boss without him knowing? Or did they just make a mistake. I mean unless you have expereince in the intelligence community, its quite hard to say no?
The intelligence agency leaks have become a virtual torrential downpour on the matter ..... and it is clear that the "sexing up" really did take place - as well as the usage of an essay from the internet
Who knows, they might use one of your posts to justify the next slaughter
The "informant" codenamed "Curveball" was the principal source for German and UK intelligence agencies and was susbsequently revealed as a Chalabi put up job and deemed unreliable. Unfortunately the revelations came only after Washington's course was set and the military mobilisation in full tilt.
Just another sanitised oversight that characterises mainstream reporting on the whole sordid affair.
And so what if he says its a myth? A) OLD NEWS! He's not the only one.
I still love him for being absolutley NUTS! And having a decent armed forces, se we are leaving Iran well alone.
But ...but ...but how will you know?
No doubt someone will quote him on it
Blagsta I have edited this post, if you had already seen my intemperate comment, I apologise.