|
Post by deovindice on Apr 9, 2007 5:41:19 GMT -5
Why would we expect the Brits to put up opposition to the Iranians?
They have already announced a drawdown regarding Iraq.
They obviously don't want additional problems with Iran.
|
|
|
Post by deovindice on Apr 9, 2007 6:01:03 GMT -5
I'd be willing to bet they were under orders to not engage anyone.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 9, 2007 21:30:13 GMT -5
deo-
I think you're exactly right.
While the Brits might be under orders not to engage, I know that American commanders in theater said that our troops are under no such restrictions.
I do understand the position that the Brits are in though. Blair can read the polls over there. If you think the US public is against the war, take a gander at the polls asked of British citizens.
Plus, consider this: London ain't called "Londonistan" fer nothin'.
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 13, 2007 16:03:09 GMT -5
I'd say that it was a failed Gulf of Tonkin. If the Brits were really in Iraqi waters who cares? They should be in BRITISH WATERS!!!!!!
You guys are some serious idiots. Buy some chia-pet and grow a brain. The US and Brits have no more credibility since the "WMD's" were never produced. And if they did have them who cares? All countries should have the right to own nukes or other WMD's.
Congress never declared the war. It is unconstitutional. The Constitution is more than a "God #$!* piece of paper". It should be used to guide this nation.
You guys never get to the root. You just cut at tips of dead twigs.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 13, 2007 22:09:04 GMT -5
Ah yes....
The Bush quote about the Constitution.
It's sort of like Bigfoot. Everyone knows somebody who has seen him (heard the quote) but no one has actually seen it (heard the quote) themselves.
Oh...and they did find WMDs. True, no stockpiles were found and what we did find were quite old and degraded (though still lethal).
But the qualtity and the condition are irrelevant. Saddam was supposed to destroy ALL of his WMDs and to prove to the UN's arms inspectors that he had done so. The presence of a single shell with 99% degraded mustard gas was a violation of the terms of the 1991 Gulf War cease fire.
What's sad is that there are those among us who would take the word of a man who says the Holocaust never happened and that Israel should be wiped off the face of the map over a man who, even if all the reasons given were false (and they aren't), did manage to liberate some 50 million people and give them a chance at a much better life than they once had.
I just wonder if you'd enjoy the freedom to speak out so against the government over in Iran. President Tom is, after all, notoriously tolerant of dissent.....
|
|
|
Post by deovindice on Apr 14, 2007 6:29:35 GMT -5
I doubt it, but then anything is possible. .......and you are a pompous ass who obviously lacks the desire for intelligent debate and instead craves mindless confrontation embellished with asinine remarks. I agree that the US and Britain have no credibility. I've said that over and over again. If you wish to engage in discourse here, you might wish to find out something about the posters here before delving into insults. WMDs were "supplied" to Iraq, that is fact. By both us and the Soviets. Hussein had embarked upon a program to produce his own, and that was thwarted. I don't agree that all countries should be allowed to have them. We let this cat out of the bag to begin with, so it is our responsibility to help ensure that others don't proliferate in this area. I agree wholeheartedly. Look around at my posts and your statement will pale in comparison. I pull the whole damned thing out of the ground.
|
|