Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the high moral ground.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the high moral ground. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 4:27:35 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		See post 71.........you claim your decided intelligence, then see if you can follow it thru post 78 which was a rebuttal of Clinton did any monkeying with the agency that led to wholesale brain drain (they didnt have one in the first fucking place) thru retirements that led them to any faulty conclusion that the administration did not desire them to find, as has been the modus operandi of that agency since its inception.

The truth is not in them.......

Reverend Ron of the church of jesus christ, what's happenin' now????




_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 4:29:42 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		My tolerance for stupidity is a bit low today so bear with me if I am short

quote:

ORIGINAL: nagatzhul2

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Bullshit, name one fucking thing that moron did to deal with Osama prior to 9/11.  He gave the Taliban millions, course you Bush lovers probably don't even know that or the fact that the Afghan bases are sited along the lines of the oil pipeline that was the root of much of this.


That nicely dances around my point that terrorism was a problem before Bush got into office.  And your allegations that Bush paid the Taliban millions is without proof. Feel free to provide some.

Children can't handle complexity, us adults are supposed to be able to.  "terrorism" isn't the name of a group, "terrorism" has been around since the dawn of time, care to actually say something specific or is "bad folks" as complex as you can manage?  Now for your free education, google "bush payments taliban $43" and take your pick of sources.

quote:

I want a President who after every foreseeable disaster doesn't say "who could have imagined" it would happen, especially since  much of what has happened was common knowledge.


Of course there is common knowledge, after the fact. And what is common knowledge is that Clinton monkeyed with our intelligence community to the point where it could not be effective in dealing with threats nor in warning the President about them. Clinton didn't want his golf games interupted.


Uh, Bush was told that Bin Laudin was going to strike and did nothing.  Bush was told that putting the Shia in charge of Iraq was a bad idea by his father and anyone with half a brain knew why.  Bush was told that there was an insurgency but for nearly a year denied it.  Bush was told New Orleans was going to flood, hell The Atlantic and god knows how many other major magazines had run articles on the danger of a hurricane to New Orleans.  These are just a few of the highlights of things any half educated moron knew before Bush took office and yet years later Bushco were  holding hands saying "who could have predicted"? 

Besides, find me a couple of things Bush did to improve the intelligence community (other than downgrading Clark, allowing the FBI's premier counter terror guy John O’Neill  to resign, cutting funding, etc.

Clinton was far from perfect but unlike Bush, Osama didn't strike the US under his watch and the amount of US deaths to overseas terrorism was a thousand times less than Bush and all without running massive deficits.  Which is why Bush will go down as the low point in US history.

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 4:35:41 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: nagatzhul2

quote:


..........and i assume we're meant to take this guy seriously as well?


Personally, I can't take any one seriously who is NOT religous. How can you take anyone seriously who can't see reality? The Founding Fathers certainly took God seriously. What I have a huge issue with is those who seek to rewrite our history in an attempt to make the Founding Fathers deists (for example). Now, I don't force my religion on anyone, but the idea that someone can not be taken seriously because they are religous is simply an ad hominem attack, nothing more.



LMFAO - People who think the founding fathers would do anything but bulldoze what passes for "christian" churches in this country is beyond me.  Unlike the racist zenophobes we have today, the embraced Muslims and Buddhists, and were Deists and such.  It isn't "rewriting" history it is correcting it.  Considering the work is being done using VAST quantities of original source material only one of the three monkeys with their eyes, ears, and mouths covered could deny it.

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 4:52:35 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		They must have disbursed the checks already.
I wonder why people like the good Archbishop never say that the U.S. has "lost the high moral ground" when the foreign aid checks are being cut?
Man, that "moral high ground" stuff doesn't last too long does it?
One day we're the best thing since sliced bread but as soon as the checks go out we're shit.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:03:14 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		popeye,

I know you love beating the drum about foreign aid but most of the world resents that supposed aid.  You think of it as money in boxes we "give" to other countries but it is far from that and much of it is welfare to US companies who are the ones who benefit most from supposed "foreign aid".

Our agricultural aid comes with all sorts of strings attached, often written by the likes of Monsanto, ie, if you want aid you have to use GMO corn, destroy native seed stocks, and become addicted.  In short it is "your first one is free till you are addicted" .

Even the money we give to Israel often has to be spent in the US.  The recievers for the Israeli Galil assualt rifle were made right here in the bay area because they needed to meet a quota of money spent in the US.

Or the money is to be spent on infrastructure that just HAPPENS to be infrastructure needed by some major US company in order to exploit some third world country easier.

In short, much of that money benefits you rather directly but it is far easier to blame others for our problems.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:06:10 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
....then see if you can follow it thru post 78 which was a rebuttal of Clinton did any monkeying with the agency.......


Post 78 was so grammatically incorrect that it was unreadable. Again, would you like to restate your points so they can be understood?

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:28:03 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

My tolerance for stupidity is a bit low today so bear with me if I am short


It's OK, so is mine. I have no problem with dishing it out when people say stupid shit.

quote:

Uh, Bush was told that Bin Laudin was going to strike and did nothing.


bin Laden was on the long term list for decades. There was no new information on bin Laden until after 9/11.

quote:

Bush was told that putting the Shia in charge of Iraq was a bad idea by his father and anyone with half a brain knew why.


There were no good choices there. Who would you suggest? The Kurds? They are not enough in the majority. The Sunni? They are worse than the Shiites. The Shiites were the only choice at that point.

quote:

Bush was told New Orleans was going to flood, hell The Atlantic and god knows how many other major magazines had run articles on the danger of a hurricane to New Orleans.


Now drop the other shoe. New Orleans is so corrupt that they have been spending federal money on "pet projects" outside of the levies for decades. It was only a matter of time before nature took its due. That is not something that Bush could have done anything about. Nor is it fair to expect that he could do anything about it.

quote:

These are just a few of the highlights of things any half educated moron knew before Bush took office and yet years later Bushco were  holding hands saying "who could have predicted"?


More ad hominem attacks?

quote:

Besides, find me a couple of things Bush did to improve the intelligence community (other than downgrading Clark, allowing the FBI's premier counter terror guy John O’Neill  to resign, cutting funding, etc.


OK, he resumed the daily briefing from the CIA that Clinton had cancelled. He worked with Congress to establish a division of the Justice Department that focused on terrorism, both domestically and abroad. He created an office that would enable all branches of the intelligence community to work together so that things would not fall through the cracks.

quote:

Clinton was far from perfect but unlike Bush, Osama didn't strike the US under his watch and the amount of US deaths to overseas terrorism was a thousand times less than Bush and all without running massive deficits.  Which is why Bush will go down as the low point in US history.


Outside of the conflict in Iraq, the deaths by terrorism were far higher under Clinton that Bush. Please, in1993 we had the World Trade Center bombing, which killed 6 and injured 1,000, in 1995 we had the bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 5 U.S. military personnel, in 1996 we had the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, in 1998 we had the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000, in 2000 we had the bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors.   That is just for starters. We had plenty of attacks against the United States interests abroad, which gave them the confidence to strike at us domestically. Clinton did exactly nothing to stop it.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:42:40 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		I love how fluidly Bush lovers change definitions, one day the meanies in Iraq are "foreign fighters", then "terrorists" then god knows what.  Uh, how many US troops have died in Iraq?  Of course you don't count them, same as you don't count Raygun cutting tail and running after 384 Marines got blown up in Lebanon.  Intellectual consistency isn't a hallmark of neocons.

Oh, and as for Bush's improvements to the intelligence community, I didn't say prior to 9/11 because I thought that was obvious to anyone that if you want to complain about the horrible damage that big evil meanie Clinton was that you were going to show me how quickly Bush moved to correct what must have been obvious damage to the intelligence community.  'Course you can't because Bush didn't improve anything and cut funding to counter terror efforts, cut out the counter-terror cabinet post, and in short, fucked up.  But why let facts interrupt a beautiful tirade that works so well around the coffee cooler.

Fact is, the problems we are facing in Iraq today were obvious prior to going in, so take your choice, incompetence or treason, heck choose both but I think treason is the one that at the end of the day will be histories choice.

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:42:55 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael
LMFAO - People who think the founding fathers would do anything but bulldoze what passes for "christian" churches in this country is beyond me.  Unlike the racist zenophobes we have today, the embraced Muslims and Buddhists, and were Deists and such.  It isn't "rewriting" history it is correcting it.  Considering the work is being done using VAST quantities of original source material only one of the three monkeys with their eyes, ears, and mouths covered could deny it.


You seem quite fond of ad hominem attacks, especially when your facts are off. They did not embrace Islam, in fact most considered Mohamed a murderer and considered Islam to be pandering to the worst parts of the human heart. They were not deists, in fact almost half were ministers of the faiths of their day. That number would go up if you county lay minister such as Washington and Jefferson. Never mind that the very definition of "deist" has changed since that to mean something almost entirely different.

We were founded as a Christian nation on Christian principles. That is the only conclusion you can come to if you look at the source material and the writings of the men in question. They come out and say exactly that, from the writings of the Congresses to their death beds.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 5:52:29 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I love how fluidly Bush lovers change definitions, one day the meanies in Iraq are "foreign fighters", then "terrorists" then god knows what.  Uh, how many US troops have died in Iraq?  Of course you don't count them, same as you don't count Raygun cutting tail and running after 384 Marines got blown up in Lebanon.  Intellectual consistency isn't a hallmark of neocons.


I am not a Bush lover. I have some serious issues with some of his policies. Spending is through the roof and he did not do enough to keep liberals from raising the deficit to a record high. The only one changing definitions here is you. I never used the term "foreign fighters" or anything else. I did make a line between open warfare and terrorist attacks. As for terrorism, how many terrorist attacks have happened in the United States since we have drawn them all to Iraq?

quote:

Oh, and as for Bush's improvements to the intelligence community, I didn't say prior to 9/11 because I thought that was obvious to anyone that if you want to complain about the horrible damage that big evil meanie Clinton was that you were going to show me how quickly Bush moved to correct what must have been obvious damage to the intelligence community.  'Course you can't because Bush didn't improve anything and cut funding to counter terror efforts, cut out the counter-terror cabinet post, and in short, fucked up.  But why let facts interrupt a beautiful tirade that works so well around the coffee cooler.


I stated what Bush did to improve things, as you requested. The fact is, that the damage was done over the long term and will be corrected in the same way. It continues to be corrected. Bush didn't have a magic wand to correct it all and frankly, there were those who were happy the damage was done (Ted Kennedy, for example). Your statements make about as much sense as a "coffee cooler."

quote:

Fact is, the problems we are facing in Iraq today were obvious prior to going in, so take your choice, incompetence or treason, heck choose both but I think treason is the one that at the end of the day will be histories choice.


If you want to suck on the tit of liberal media for your information, I am sure you will come to that conclusion. If you want to actually use basic logic and look at the facts, they will lead you down another path.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 6:04:26 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

popeye,

I know you love beating the drum about foreign aid but most of the world resents that supposed aid.  You think of it as money in boxes we "give" to other countries but it is far from that and much of it is welfare to US companies who are the ones who benefit most from supposed "foreign aid".

Our agricultural aid comes with all sorts of strings attached, often written by the likes of Monsanto, ie, if you want aid you have to use GMO corn, destroy native seed stocks, and become addicted.  In short it is "your first one is free till you are addicted" .

Even the money we give to Israel often has to be spent in the US.  The recievers for the Israeli Galil assualt rifle were made right here in the bay area because they needed to meet a quota of money spent in the US.

Or the money is to be spent on infrastructure that just HAPPENS to be infrastructure needed by some major US company in order to exploit some third world country easier.

In short, much of that money benefits you rather directly but it is far easier to blame others for our problems.


Michael, I'm totally aware of that and don't disagree with what you've said at all.
If we had a President with some balls who said he was going to end the foreign aid programs the people screaming to the high heavens would be the lawyers and lobbyists in Washington in the $800 suits!
Talk about being "addicted" to government money year after year!
THEN we'd see some "starving children" infomercials!

< Message edited by popeye1250 -- 11/25/2007 6:05:51 PM >

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 7:08:52 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

is through the roof and he did not do enough to keep liberals from raising the deficit to a record high.


quote:

I did make a line between open warfare and terrorist attacks.



quote:

As for terrorism, how many terrorist attacks have happened in the United States since we have drawn them all to Iraq?



quote:

  Bush didn't have a magic wand to correct it all



quote:

  If you want to actually use basic logic and look at the facts,

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 7:35:33 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html

quote:

 Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.

 Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.


Below are a few tidbits from Jefferson, if these men were "christian" in the sense the christian taliban use today, I will eat my hat...

quote:


The priests of the different religions sects dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight, and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subdivision of the duperies on which they live.---- Thomas Jefferson


quote:


"I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature.....Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make half the world fools and half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the world"


(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 7:56:47 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=23164

Catholic, other religious leaders call Bush's Iraq War policies 'morally bankrupt'

http://www.cjd.org/paper/jp2war.html

Pope John Paul II calls War a Defeat for Humanity: Neoconservative Iraq Just War Theories Rejected


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0306-04.htm

President Bush, fresh from making plans for war against Iraq, met for 40 minutes Wednesday with Cardinal Pio Laghi, an emissary from the Vatican who made a last appeal for peace.


http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/12/25/pope/

VATICAN CITY -- Pope John Paul II used his Christmas Day address to urge the world to avoid war in the Middle East, an apparent reference to the crisis over Iraq.

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 7:59:57 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:


Don't you mean Clinton's failure? Clinton was the one that left things sitting for two terms after being advised by the UN that there were still live weapons in Iraq.


Which, if they were there, WERE NOT A THREAT TO YOU, and therefore Lincoln's Justification for mobilizing the Republic was never reached.




_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 8:02:33 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:


I am not a Bush lover. I have some serious issues with some of his policies. Spending is through the roof and he did not do enough to keep liberals from raising the deficit to a record high.


Bush NEVER had to sign a single spending bill which reached his desk... He DID sign them, so it's not just the Libs fault spending is up. And since they weren't controlling the process until recently, I'm curious how exactly ONLY the Libs own the Trillion Dollar Debt for the War.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 8:42:58 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Below are a few tidbits from Jefferson, if these men were "christian" in the sense the christian taliban use today, I will eat my hat...


Any particular sauce you would like with your hat? And I said Christian, not the fictional group you refer to. And by Christian, I mean Christian by their own definition and claim.

For example, the some of the founding fathers said the following:

Patrick Henry stated,"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."

John Adams of Massachusetts, a lawyer and the second president, wrote in a letter to Jefferson on June 28, 1813. He said, "The general principles on which the Fathers achieved independence, were . . . the general principles of Christianity."

Samuel Adams, said as the Declaration of Independence was being signed, "We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His kingdom come." Samuel Adams also said, "First of all, I ... rely upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins."

Benjamin Franklin said, "He who shall introduce into the public affairs the principles of a primitive Christianity, will change the face of the world."

And Thomas Jefferson said, "The reason that Christianity is the best friend of government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart."

Jefferson is also quoted as having said, "I am a Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ."

Isaac Potts wrote this of Washington, "I have seen this day what I shall never forget. Till now I have thought that a Christian and a soldier were incompatible; but if George Washington be not a man of God, I am mistaken, and still more shall I be disappointed if God does not through him perform some great thing for his country."

John Jay (the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) stated, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." while on the bench.

When looking at the documents and minutes of that time period, we find that all meetings were opened with a prayer and a blessing. They even went so far as to fast before the opening of sessions. Oaths of office were taken on the Bible, in the name of Jesus Christ. Sorry, but you can't logically claim they were not Christian.

I am glad you bring up the Treaty of Tripoli, however. Here was a treaty with a Muslim nation. And they worried that we were Christian in the same sense that they were Muslim. We aren't. We enforce no state religion under pain of death. It is not Christianity or else. And as such, article 11, which was not included in the arabic version and was dropped when it was ratified, made reference to us not being a Christian nation. It did not, however, say that we were not a nation of Christians founded on Christian principles and practices. That would have been a lie.


(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 8:46:06 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Which, if they were there, WERE NOT A THREAT TO YOU, and therefore Lincoln's Justification for mobilizing the Republic was never reached.


That was the point, Saddam was stating that he was going to use them. Him having them was also a violation of the terms of his surrender. As such, under internation law, we were fully justified in renewing the conflict.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 8:48:26 PM   
nagatzhul2


Posts: 24
Joined: 1/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle
Bush NEVER had to sign a single spending bill which reached his desk... He DID sign them, so it's not just the Libs fault spending is up. And since they weren't controlling the process until recently, I'm curious how exactly ONLY the Libs own the Trillion Dollar Debt for the War.


That was my point, he did sign them and that is why I have an issue with him. However, he could not have signed what the libs didn't present, could he? And the libs were the ones who attached the riders to most of the expensive bills.

Everyone owns the debt for the war, they all voted for it. Only Ron Paul objected to it, if I remember correctly. They all own it, not just Bush.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the hig... - 11/25/2007 11:12:15 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: nagatzhul2

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Which, if they were there, WERE NOT A THREAT TO YOU, and therefore Lincoln's Justification for mobilizing the Republic was never reached.


That was the point, Saddam was stating that he was going to use them. Him having them was also a violation of the terms of his surrender. As such, under internation law, we were fully justified in renewing the conflict.



No we weren't. The standard of action for a Constitutional Republic was framed by Lincoln, at Gettysburg, and whatever "threat" Iraq may have been to anyone, it DID NOT REACH THE LEVEL REQUIRED TO MOBILIZE THE REPUBLIC.

Or do you contend that Lincoln was WRONG in the Gettysburg Address?



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to nagatzhul2)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Archbishop of Canterbury says U.S. has lost the high moral ground. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.105