Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!
Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.
The 34 people who died at a wedding was from an airstrike. Pilots attacked the site where people were firing rifles into the air, they had been instructed to return fire when fired at. Unknown to them it was in celebration for the wedding that had just taken place. Mistakes happen.Originally posted by Bluey
Just remeber a few things like the Bunker busters used in afganistan that were so accurate they missed ther targets by allmost 1 mile and killed 40 people at a wedding?
There u go ago.Originally posted by Gen76
Just having weapons of mass distruction isnt a valid reason.Sure hes used em in the past, but u can judge future crimes which hasnt happend on past crimes.Think ppl!!
Originally posted by Gen76
Sure hes breaking that UN resolution.But was it placed there for the right reasons?
Are these not good enough reasons? The rest of the World seemed to think so.Originally posted by DraizeTrain
Hes invaded & wrecked Kuwait, attacked Israel with ballistic missiles, gassed Kurds in the north...
Name them.Originally posted by Gen76
I go back to what ive said before about there being loadsa other bastards who operate freely without intervention.
So AGAIN u cant answer a simple enough question. If dodging the issue was an Olympic sport I reckon u could represent Norway.Originally posted by Gen76
Draze would it seems.
Draze: go read something instead of just spouting what uve heard on tv.If i thought u were out to do anything other than take the piss i might answer u.As it is your ignorance shines to much for me to take anything u say serious.So if i dont play into your future pisstaking plz assume anything u want.
Name them. If there are `loads' as u claim u shouldnt have any trouble eh.Originally posted by Gen76
I go back to what ive said before about there being loadsa other bastards who operate freely without intervention.
True indeed...but lets be honest, the current problem with Iraq is not about morals but about regional and possibly World security, or so they tell us .Originally posted by SteelHORN
Firstly morals r easy to preach when u are a developed, powerful country. Secondly wars fought on morals aren't very successful (Somalia, Vietnam).
But does he have a big following? We cant really tell can we. Sure he holds the country in an iron grip but i doubt if thats through popularity.Originally posted by SteelHORN
To wage war against 'evil' you have to fight nice: To do this while trying to overthrow a leader who has a big following in his country(like Saddam has) is madness.
Well say this were to happen. At whos door would the blame lie? The West for actually doing it or Saddam for endangering the lives of his ppl by operating the country the way he does in the first place? A very contentious point.Originally posted by SteelHORN
We'd have to kill tens of thousands of innocent ppl, and who would stand and support that?