Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Invading Iraq After 9/11 Is Like Invading Mexico After Pearl Harbor

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708

    Invading Iraq After 9/11 Is Like Invading Mexico After Pearl Harbor

    Discuss...
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  2. #2
    dz Guest
    more likely targets after 9/11:
    1) Saudi Arabia
    2) Pentagon/CIA headquarters

    but, we had to keep those terrorists from attacking us at home.. and im sure thats what weve accomplished :roll:

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708
    Well, technically, 9/11 was a murder. Granted, the murder of 3,000 people, but a murder nevertheless... So... who do we hold accountable in a murder? An ENTIRE country, or the ones responsible for the atrocity?
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  4. #4
    dz Guest

  5. #5
    Good Doctor HST Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gold9472
    Well, technically, 9/11 was a murder. Granted, the murder of 3,000 people, but a murder nevertheless... So... who do we hold accountable in a murder? An ENTIRE country, or the ones responsible for the atrocity?
    I agree, 9/11 was a murder, NOT an act of war. As Gore Vidal says, bombing Afghanistan after 9/11 is like bombing Sicily when the Mafia killed and terrorized U.S. citizens. Makes no sense.

    Unless there are ulterior motives besides bringing justice......

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708
    Quote Originally Posted by Good Doctor HST
    I agree, 9/11 was a murder, NOT an act of war. As Gore Vidal says, bombing Afghanistan after 9/11 is like bombing Sicily when the Mafia killed and terrorized U.S. citizens. Makes no sense.

    Unless there are ulterior motives besides bringing justice......
    A snippet of something I wrote a while back...

    "Iraq had no involvement in 9/11, and they knew that before going in. America is not safer as a result of this war. Because of it, we've now become more of a target than ever before. So retaliation can't be the reason. If retaliation were the reason, we would have gone to war with Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.

    The only "positive" things that have come out of this war is that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power, and American companies in the Middle East are making billions. However, the U.S. Government installed a CIA operative as the leader of Iraq. That's essentially what Saddam Hussein was at the time of his coronation. So that positive negates itself.

    That leaves money. Money is the only positive that has come out of this war, and it's all gone to the wrong people. That isn't justification for a war against a country that never attacked the United States in any way, shape, or form. Surely, the American public would know better than to go to war for just money. No moral person would be willing to sacrifice lives for money.

    So that leaves a big question. How did this administration get permission to go to war with a country that was in no way threatening to us, and benefits only a select few? Maybe they allowed 9/11 to happen. Maybe they didn't. I will say this. We would not have gone to war if it didn't. I can show you page after page of incriminating evidence that show this administration wanted to go to war with Iraq long before 9/11 took place. They just didn't have a reason. 9/11 gave them that reason.

    If my reasoning has any legitimacy, the families of 9/11, and the people of America deserve to know about it. The 9/11 Commission is a sham. The proof exists. They just refuse to release it."
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  7. #7
    Good Doctor HST Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gold9472

    So that leaves a big question. How did this administration get permission to go to war with a country that was in no way threatening to us, and benefits only a select few?
    Because ever since Abraham Lincoln, presidents have had the ability to go over Congress's head and declare war courtesy of Executive Decision. It helps when the public is easily frightened by strange looking dark men that are different; then the rest of the check/balance triumvirate (House, Senate) are shamed into supporting bombing weirdo countries.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708
    But the President can only do that for 90 days I believe... Congress would have to declare "War" in order for those efforts to continue...
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708
    The War Powers Resolution

    In 1973 United States involvement in the Vietnam War (1959-1975) rekindled an old argument over whether a president has the authority as commander in chief to send U.S. troops into combat, thereby usurping Congress’s power to declare war. The resulting War Powers Resolution attempted to restrict the president’s ability to order military deployments by calling for the president to consult with Congress before sending troops into hostilities, to make periodic reports on the status of hostilities, and to end unauthorized hostilities after 60 days. The resolution, which Congress has rarely enforced, passed over President Richard Nixon’s veto and became law in November 1973. Its key provisions are excerpted below. Herbert S. Parmet
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,708
    Sorry... 60 days...
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-16-2007, 09:43 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-21-2005, 07:40 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-04-2005, 12:23 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-17-2005, 12:05 AM
  5. Memo to Bush: The case for invading Canada
    By somebigguy in forum The New News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2005, 09:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •