Who here dislikes American Soldiers and thinks they are Murderers? - Page 3

Andaras · #21 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus

Yes it does.

Not according to International Law.

FlackBait · #22 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proof-hunter

Every nation is sovereign.
When they knock down 2 buildings killing 3000 people they lose their sovereignty.

Then why haven't we bombed Saudi Arabia? I find it hilarious that your screen name is proof-hunter.

CrusaderRabbit08 · #23 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasTequila

Were we right to attack Germany in WW2? They had not directly attacked us.

But they did attack us first. They were attacking our ships prior to our entry into the war.

On 31 Oct 1941, the USS Reuben James, a Clemson class destroyer, was sunk by a German submarine, killing over 100 American sailors. Prior to this sinking, they had attacked several other Navy destroyers.

CrusaderRabbit08 · #24 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2

There are a few here who hate the troops who are defending this nation vehemently.
Who they are is obvious.. no matter how hard they try to shroud it.

Oooo ..I wonder who they are?

C-D-P · #25 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08

But they did attack us first. They were attacking our ships prior to our entry into the war.

On 31 Oct 1941, the USS Reuben James, a Clemson class destroyer, was sunk by a German submarine, killing over 100 American sailors. Prior to this sinking, they had attacked several other Navy destroyers.

Saddam shot at our planes, and enabled bad guys that killed US citizens abroad.

How can you say one was justified and the other not, when they commited acts of violence against us?

CrusaderRabbit08 · #26 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-D-P

Saddam shot at our planes, and enabled bad guys that killed US citizens abroad.

You mean planes in the no-fly zone? Well placed strikes whenever an incident occurred would've been sufficient. He was only a threat to our forces over there. He was never a threat to our mainland. Besides, we should've left after the war was over and we wouldn't have been targets.

Germany, on the other hand, did pose a severe threat to us. She was far stronger than Saddam ever was. When she started attacking our ships and declared war against us, we really had no choice.

Two totally different situations. Germany had a powerful army, navy, and air force. Saddam never did. He had a large army that was easily defeated, and his navy and air force were a joke. So much for his threat.

C-D-P · #27 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08

You mean planes in the no-fly zone? Well placed strikes whenever an incident occurred would've been sufficient.

Really? Cause that is exactly what we did after almost all of the 651 attacks on our craft in a SEVEN MONTH period. Did not seem to work too well. Obviously surgical strikes on military targets were not enough to dissuade Saddam.

http://www.csmng.com/images/spaceobs...2003-08-07.pdf

Quote:

Known within CENTCOM
and CENTAF as
“Southern Focus,” coalition air
forces dropped 606 bombs,
responding to 651 attacks from
June 2002 until OIF began
March 19.
The Iraqi attacks peaked
with more than a dozen missiles
and rockets per day being
fired at coalition forces.
On one day, Iraqi air-defense
forces fired 15 surface-to-air
missiles.

There were many more attacks on us long before the build up ever started. He had been firing on us ever since the sanctions were placed.

Quote:

He was only a threat to our forces over there. He was never a threat to our mainland. Besides, we should've left after the war was over and we wouldn't have been targets.

Who else was going to enforce the sanctions?

CrusaderRabbit08 · #28 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-D-P

Who else was going to enforce the sanctions?

I didn't care about the sanctions; that was the UN's problem, not ours. I never supported the Gulf War to begin with. So I never supported sending our military over there. And if we were never there, then we never would've been targets.

BuckNaked · #29 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 11:00 AM

I dislike idiots who use the troops as political pawns, and hate the troops when they follow the orders they are sworn too, and do not direct that justifiable anger at the politicians who (I also dislike) create wars, and use the troops as their own private army for profiteering and protecting corporate interests over/above/beyond what is in the best interest of the nation as a whole!

They are there to defend the nation, and kick arses and take names when we are actually attacked or threatened with force!

C-D-P · #30 (**permalink**) 05-22-2008, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08

I didn't care about the sanctions; that was the UN's problem, not ours. I never supported the Gulf War to begin with. So I never supported sending our military over there. And if we were never there, then we never would've been targets.

Sure are a lot of Is in there.

Anyway. What do you think would have happened if we were not there, or we did not go in back then?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
so much for supporting the American soldiers	justabubba	Elections & Campaigns	0	05-17-2007 12:40 PM
American soldiers...	abuhamza	Media & Commentators	2	10-16-2006 01:18 PM
Five American soldiers killed in Iraq	rashed	Terrorism	2	10-11-2006 01:39 AM
Four American soldiers killed in Iraq	rashed	Terrorism	19	08-19-2006 04:33 PM
Who strongly dislikes the ACLU?	savagecich911	Political Opinions & Beliefs	31	08-06-2004 11:57 AM