Originally posted by RJHindsThe US invaded Afghanistan without UN approval.
Not true.
Some people seem to quickly get amnesia on this website.
The USA was attacked on September 11, 2001 which resulted in the murder of about 3000 people. The President and congress of the USA decided the USA needed to respond quickly against the aggressors. Various intelligence sources initially indicated that the Islamist militant group al-Qa ...[text shortened]... s of al-Qaeda became a priority to prevent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) did not authorize the U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom).
Defenders of the legitimacy of the U.S.-led invasion argue that U.N. Security Council authorization was not required since the invasion was an act of collective self-defense provided for under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and therefore was not a war of aggression.[69][70] Critics maintain that the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan were not legitimate self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter because the 9/11 attacks were not “armed attacks” by another state, but rather were perpetrated by groups of individuals or non-state actors, and that these attackers had no proven connection to Afghanistan. Further, it is their opinion that even if a state had perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, no bombing campaign would constitute self-defense; the necessity for self-defense must be "instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation."[69]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Legal_basis_for_war
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne[/b]You must think I give a rats arse about what the UN thinks?
The US invaded Afghanistan without UN approval.[b]The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) did not authorize the U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom).
Defenders of the legitimacy of the U.S.-led invasion argue that U.N. Security Council authorization was not required since the invasion was an act of c ...[text shortened]... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Legal_basis_for_war
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseDon't you realize some abortions kill babies in the woman's womb? What did the baby do in the womb that was so wrong that it deserves death? I am not against killing human beings, but there needs to be a better reason than it is the woman's choice, IMO. If a woman gets raped, it is the rapist that did something wrong and deserves death, not the baby. If the woman kills her baby in the womb, it is the woman that deserves death, not the baby. Whoever kills a baby in the mother's womb deserves death, not the baby. The baby did nothing wrong that I can see. What do you say the baby could have done wrong that deserves death, without even a trial? I don't think any woman should have that much power to kill another human being just because she chooses.
You don't want women to get abortions. That is their decision and none, repeat, NONE of your business.
That is a prime example of you wanting to control women.
Originally posted by RJHindsOf course it varies. The worth of anything is relative to the value we place on it. Silly wabbit.
Don't you realize some abortions kill babies in the woman's womb? What did the baby do in the womb that was so wrong that it deserves death? I am not against killing human beings, but there needs to be a better reason than it is the woman's choice, IMO. If a woman gets raped, it is the rapist that did something wrong and deserves death, not the baby. If ...[text shortened]... any woman should have that much power to kill another human being just because she chooses.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by RJHindsdo you think drone strikes on military targets in civilian areas in afghanistan is acceptable?
Don't you realize some abortions kill babies in the woman's womb? What did the baby do in the womb that was so wrong that it deserves death? I am not against killing human beings, but there needs to be a better reason than it is the woman's choice, IMO. If a woman gets raped, it is the rapist that did something wrong and deserves death, not the baby. If ...[text shortened]... any woman should have that much power to kill another human being just because she chooses.
Originally posted by dunetwoYou have forgotten My Lai incident in Vietnam war when Lt. William Law Calley's soldiers wantonly killed women and children of that village.
As shocking and sad the Connecticut shootings were, it boggles the mind that the thousands of innocent children killed and maimed in the Iraq/Afghanistan wars by the mighty USA are less sensational. Could it be that the value of a child's life varies according to nationality and/or financial status?
Have you ever seen the photographs which appeared in Life Magazine around Dec.68 or so ?
In the first photograph a girl of about 12 or 13 is seen looking at a US soldier who is aiming his rifle at her. The girl is cradling a small kid of about 2 or 3 in her arms, most probably her sibling. The girl is looking at the US soldier with mixed emotions on her face, fear, wonderment, but a bit of hope is also seen on her face that he may not kill her after all. Such a powerful man after all ! The next photo shows the blood spattered bodies of both the kids lying on the ground, dead as dead can be, their bodies torn up as rag dolls torn up by children of similar age, the products of US ammunition technology ( the best in the world, no doubt ! ) having done their work.
These photos , I will never forget. The USA became a nation of crazies in my eyes since then and I have not regained the good feelings I had , well before this incident , for the nation of Washington, Franklin and Lincoln.