Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
The United States is, and don't you believe under international law it is illegal for a foreign nation to overthrough a regime?
|
As indeed is advocating same by the use of force without international warranty or treaty. Bush Snr called for the Iraqi's to rise up and depose Saddam. The United States called for the uprising then promptly ran away when it realized it had, in effect, condoned genocide by doing so. You'd have known this if you'd bothered to read the link I gave earlier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Yes, I do, France and Russia wanted to get as much money as possible from Saddam, after all, they're the biggest suppliers of weapons to him, and Germany couldn't afford to go to war so in an attempt to gain public support at home, they chose not to take action.
|
You forgot "In my opinion". Oh, and who is it that's getting as much money as possible from Saddam at the moment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Yes, the cause was ousting a dictator, the effect was international law got in the way.
|
Pesky old international law, eh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Definitely you.
If you believe Saddam was justified, then the responsibility lies with the shia for uprising, however if you don't believe he was justified, then the responsibility lies with Saddam..
|
That is the most ridiculous attempt at logic ever. So, according to you, if I believe Saddam was justified then, even though he murdered the Shia marsh arabs, it was their fault? Alternatively, if I don't believe that Saddam was justified then the responsibility for the murder of the marsh arabs lies with him? What if good old Saddam believes he was justified in all of his actions? Are you saying that because he believes he was right then the responsibility for the deaths of his victims is their own fault? Get a grip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
My deepest appologies, I didn't realise that you couldn't understand simple logic unless explained in many little words, I'll remember that for future reference.
|
At least your second effort was a more expansive attempt at making your still ridiculous point. Your wording makes even the most rudimentary of statements beyond "simple (perhaps the operative word) logic" practically indecipherable.
For the love of God man, get some english lessons.