1 edit
Originally posted by UncleAdamZanzibar War, 1896. Between Britain and Zanzibar. If I recall correctly, it lasted from 9:02 AM until 9:40. It was formally declared. The only casualties were those on a Zanzibar battleship that was sunk. No civilians. This post if foolish and silly, but true, and it cuts your rhetorical question to small pieces.
NAME 1 WAR WITH NO CIVILIAN DEATHS?
Originally posted by royalchickenit does, because before the 20th centuray we had no weapons with range enough to do damage out side the battle field. the advent of the plane changed all that.
This post if foolish and silly, but true, and it cuts your rhetorical question to small pieces.
Name one post 1900 war that involved no civilian casulties
Look people, is this war about (inter)national security, Iraqi liberation, or oil?
If it's security, then it is 'bombing for peace'.
If it's oil, then Bush and Blair deserve all the criticism they can get, though I would doubt even Rumsfeld is insane enough to start that kind of war.
If it's Iraqi liberation, then it's a damn stupid reason to fight a war. Pardon me, but aren't there far more effective ways of alleviating suffering in the world, such as reducing agricultural subsidy, or sending aid packages to countries hit by natural disasters? If we're only prepared to do so much to help the rest of humanity, we could at least focus it where it'll do the most good.
1 edit
Originally posted by AcolyteI belive its a mix of 1 and 3 (security and liberation).
Look people, is this war about (inter)national security, Iraqi liberation, or oil?
If it's security, then it is 'bombing for peace'.
If it's oil, then Bush and Blair deserve all the criticism they can get, though I would doubt eve ...[text shortened]... umanity, we could at least focus it where it'll do the most good.
I agree with you, I think that there few people that would be stupid enough to go to war for oil, everyone would hate someone like that, and I dont think Bush and Blair are that dum, (I'm not saying they are dun its just an expression).
Originally posted by UncleAdamdefended what, do you believe this was a war? this is an invasion!!, do you believe i could fight against your two years old son? me a man 30 years old? what is going to be the result? how would you feel? is that a fight? not is an Abuse of power!
They could have defended around the city, not inside it
Originally posted by UncleAdamwell do you know any politician Republican? of confidence? he would tell you the truth, that oil is one of the most important cause of this invasion.
I belive its a mix of 1 and 3 (security and liberation).
I agree with you, I think that there few people that would be stupid enough to go to war for oil, everyone would hate someone like that, and I dont think Bush and Blair are that dum, (I'm not saying they are dun its just an expression).
Originally posted by Boby Fisherwell id blow ur head off, think of me as the UN. if the war was really that bad, do you really think america and britain could withstand the wraith of the UN, remeber that the UN would have intervined if they thought it that bad (instead they stand back and let us do their dirty work).
defended what, do you believe this was a war? this is an invasion!!, do you believe i could fight against your two years old son? me a man 30 years old? what is going to be the result? how would you feel? is that a fight? not is an Abuse of power!
I just heard on the news that the UN is oppossing the lifting of sanctions because Iraq may have WoMD!!! this when they expressed opposition to the war because iraq may not have WoMD
(make ur mind up boys) can any one comfirm this?
Originally posted by nktwildgo onto google and type in " these weapons of mass destruction cannot be shown" click on about the 3rd 1 down. that's what made up my mind
well id blow ur head off, think of me as the UN. if the war was really that bad, do you really think america and britain could withstand the wraith of the UN, remeber that the UN would have intervined if they thought it that bad (instead they stand back and let us do their dirty work).
I just heard on the news that the UN is oppossing the lifting of sanct ...[text shortened]... ion to the war because iraq may not have WoMD
(make ur mind up boys) can any one comfirm this?