Quote Originally Posted by Lyle View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing View Post
Not according to international law you didn't. So bearing that in mind, should B and B face trial for war crimes?
We give the world these little tokens like the UN and all you shmoes want to do is try and take us down with them.

1. We supported him figuring he would be a benelovent dictator, but I just guess that's the way the cookie crumbles...every single time

2. Yeah, I do get confused all the time about that , I forgot that England, France, and Spain were the last powers to be able to control other countries.

3. I am just using the FACT that based on precedent Bush and Blair are in the clear.
The UN are you shitting me? The Us have one of the worst politics toward UN, especially since the Bush era, they wanted it dismantled because they said it goes against their interests. They are paying way too late their annually contributions, dammit, read a bit about it Lyle, I understand that my job consists of knowing these things among others but that is quite basic facts there!

2) you always confuse the past with the present, it's not because some stuff 400 years ago was considered ok (i.e forced colonization) that it is ok today (I.e US corporated colonization). Iraq has been a mass murder, a decapitation of a country where now education system are ruined because of how poor and not necessary was the intervention in Iraq.

3) yeah, you supported a dictator because he was buying tons of your stuff, the US never cared when they used chemical weapons against Iran, that was "not your problem", but then when Saddam continues to be all evil but that you dislike it, then the good old uncle Saddam becomes evil. There should never been a support in the first instance, what you suggest is pure hypocrisy, it's like if you were saying that it is ok to support canadian democracy and because you did support it, it is also ok to attack them and dismantle the country if it doesn,t serve your interests anymore.