And still, not one convincing argument.

Same old rhetoric.

Obfuscatory responses.

Self proclaimed "experts" on the useful lifetime and viability of biological/chemical weaponry. I would think those who have "been there" and "done that" would have a bit more credibility than the "opiners".

When someone does present factual info that refutes a particular preconceived notion, the argument degenerates into name calling and subject changing.

Did or did not the US back Iraq a few decades ago? Did or did not the US supply Iraq with potentially dangerous material? Non partisan questions. Let's see some nonpartisan factual responses.

The US government is the invader, but is to be held to US law, by we Americans.

On the other hand, since US government troops are fact invaders, any method to kill them is lawful, moral, and ethical. Including dismemberment, and whatever else could be done to get the invaders to leave.

The Iraqi Freedom Fighters are acting as I would act if the US were invaded by a ruthless foreign government.

Are you getting an understanding yet?

I've understood for a long time that you hate the US military and that you're on the side of the beheaders.

pat:

The problem is that the average "Joe" who is getting killed, injured or mutilated is not the one creating the policy. In a perfect world, those at the top who advocate war should personally duke it out in a steel cage match. War might just become a thing of the past.

Law? You now are wanting law? Slopat, that requires a government!!! You are saying that you want no govt but now you want law?

You cannot have your cake and eat it at the same time, but it appears that you want the best of both worlds and thats not going to work.

When are you going to move to another country? One that you support that is?

The more I read what was done to our two soldiers (castrated and genitals put into their mouths while alive, hearts cut out, beheaded) the more I think you are a fuking piece of $hit you *******. Go to hell you enemy-loving cocksucker.

Wrong on both counts. First, I am on my family's side, then my neighbors side, then I'm on the side of my countrymen; in this case most southerners. Second, I don't hate the military at all, I hate what they are currently doing, and wish them zero success in it. As an aggregate, the US military is carrying out mass murder in a foreign land. And last, I'm always in support, philosophically, of those defending their land against a ruthless invader. That the invader is the US government, matters not one whit to me.

Got that, genius?

I agree in principle, MG, but all of them are volunteers today, and what's more, most volunteered knowing, or should have known, that this War was illegal. Certainly, I've been an advocate for years of not allowing anyone under 21 to join the military at all, and I'd argue that age should be not less than 25 years of age. When I was commanding soldiers at the unit level, the youngest were always the most eager to go in harms way, in fact it was very hard to make them wait for the right moment. When our job was defending a fixed position, that was the most difficult, waiting on an enemy to attack. The youngest always wanted to go hunting for them.

That said, ignorance is no excuse, if you're commiting mass murder under orders, you are still commiting a crime.

No, Joe, the law does not require a government. That's an ancient myth.

Quote:

You cannot have your cake and eat it at the same time, but it appears that you want the best of both worlds and thats not going to work. When are you going to move to another country? One that you support that is?

I support America everyday. I do not support the US government. As I've explained to you many times, the US government has never been America, isn't America today, and will never be America in the future. Bill Clinton said, "you can't love your country and hate your government", he was wrong. Sociofascists have always drawn strength with the claim that the government is the people; that's going to change, and it must change if America is to survive.

They weren't "our" soldiers, they were agents of the federal government in a foreign country illegally, murdering the citizens thereof, got caught and made examples of.

Get used to it, chump.

914 and pat:

This may not come out right, my keyboard skips sometimes and I have to continually fix the response.

No amount of logic, reason, or empathy will change the mind of a fundamentalist zealot, whether they be "us" or "them". A study of the social systems and religious supremacy in daily life allows only one conclusion: Anything can be justified.

That being said, no number of labels will ever resolve a difference of opinion, and simply leads to retaliation. One relevant example is the president referring to "the Axis of Evil" and expecting a member of that "axis" to take kindly to it.

Sometimes I even see a bit of logic in pat's thinking (not too often, I'll admit), but nonetheless, the idea of a "Pax Americana" is disturbing to me, and should be to a lot more. We do not have the resources to manage the entire world; we have enough trouble managing this small part of it.

The above is only my opinions.

Two Republicans claim WMD found in Iraq
Santorum, Hoekstra cite sarin-laced shells produced before ’91 Gulf War

WASHINGTON - Two Republicans lawmakers who insist Iraq may have had weapons of mass destruction are pointing to a newly declassified report.

The document says coalition forces have found 500 munitions in Iraq that contained degraded sarin or mustard nerve agents, produced before the 1991 Gulf War.

Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan on Wednesday cited the report in an attempt to counter criticism by Democrats who say the decision to go to war was a mistake.

But defense officials said that the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age. Pentagon officials told NBC News that the munitions are are the same kind of ordnance the U.S. military has been gathering up in Iraq for the past several years, and "not the WMD we were looking for when we went in this time."

Democrats say a report from the top U.S. weapons inspector contemplated that older munitions bearing traces of chemical agents would be found.

A leading Democrat on intelligence issues says that Santorum's assertion last night that there were in fact weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was politically motivated.

Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., says "it's a bit suspicious that this was rolled out the night before" the debate and vote in the Senate on withdrawal from Iraq "by a senator in a close political race."

Santorum is down 18 points in his Senate re-election contest, according to a poll released yesterday.

Harman says it's "unfortunate" that people have "not learned the lesson about hyping... and cherry picking" intelligence to suit their own aims.

For his part, Hoekstra, appearing before cameras on Thursday, reiterated his assertions of Wednesday evening, saying, "Iraq is NOT a WMD-free zone" and it "amazes me" that members of Congress still say that there was no WMD in Iraq.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13480264/

Do a search on Rick's record and various stands. It might help in the discussion.

For the good of the world we entered Iraq. It was not only legal but our moral obligation. Any alleged crimes are but a blip, an unfortunate cost to war. No other country on the face of earth would be subject to the neo-fascist scrutiny our military is. No country on the face of the planet is as humane as the American military, to the point of increasing our vulnerability and dragging out the operation...But this plays right into the hands of the leftists, doesn't it?...You do the job, and you get accused of war crimes...You don't do the job because of liberal imposed political corrrectness and you are blamed for not progressing fast enough and American casualties...Liberals create the problems and then blame Bush for the problems...Reminiscent of Katrina...typical liberal play, create the problem and then blame the other party.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Seems to me your "freedom fighters" have a strange way of fighting for freedom...mainly by blowing up their own countrymen, burning mosques and beheading people.

Ghandi was a freedom fighter...George Washington was a Freedom Fighter ...but I can't see a political motive for "freedom" in the Iraqi insurgency. Just sadism. The fact that you lionize people who have more in common with Charles Manson than with George Washington is truly, truly revolting.

I disagree with how things are handled in Iraq, but you need to get your moral compass on straight.

No, "we" did not, the US government did that. It was and remains unlawful.

Quote:

It was not only legal but our moral obligation.

Spoken like a true sociofascist, they're always claiming they went to war for moral principles. The real truth is that no one has ever initiated a war morally.

Quote:

Any alleged crimes are but a blip, an unfortunate cost to war. No other country on the face of earth would be subject to the neo-fascist scrutiny our military is.

Imagine, a fascist calling his enemies what he is. Talk about chutzpah.

Quote:

No country on the face of the planet is as humane as the American military, to the point of increasing our vulnerability and dragging out the operation...But this plays right into the hands of the leftists, doesn't it?

There is no such thing as a humane war, never was, never will be.

Quote:

...You do the job, and you get accused of war crimes...You don't do the job because of liberal imposed political corrrectness and you are blamed for not progressing fast enough and American casualties...Liberals create the problems and then blame Bush for the problems...Reminiscent of Katrina...typical liberal play, create the problem and then blame the other party. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

"Liberals", whoever they are, did not force this sociofascist president to invade anywhere; he chose to do so for his neo-conservative agenda. Bush and his close friends were looking for an excuse to invade Iraq, and got one on 9/11/2001.

The invasion and attempted occupation of Iraq was and always will be illegal. Bush and the Bush'ists should be swinging from lamp posts as examples to those who would consider this ever again.

I really can't believe that Pat celebrates the torture and killing of our young American soldiers. Even if you are 100% correct (you're not) these are still young, brave, impressionable kids that are only doing what their country asks of them. You are sad sad pathetic little man.

You would have had a valid point had 9-11 not occurred...It did, you don't.

Len,

These brave men were not soldiers, they were agents of the federal government if we are to believe slopat.

What a crock of brown material. And to think that he was in our military for long enough to now soak the American taxpayer to pay his retirement while he now sticks a knive in their back at every chance.

Again, they're not "our" young soldiers. They're not defending America, they're not remotely defending America, they ARE in a sovereign foreign nation killing the people that live there for pay. That's what they are, and that's all they are. You can take this "our" feces and flush it.

Quote:

Even if you are 100% correct (you're not) these are still young, brave, impressionable kids that are only doing what their country asks of them. You are sad sad pathetic little man.

No, they are armed thugs killing people in another country without any, repeat ANY, legal basis whatsoever. They are no better than a criminal gang who murder for both money and sport.

Do you follow this, or not?

You, Joe, 914GT, Mul and the others supporting this mass murder in Iraq will have much to atone for in the future, are you prepared to do so?

I view those supporting the mass murder in Iraq the same as I would a serial baby rapist/murderer.

Have I driven this home yet? Or do you need more?