100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Now It's Time to Bring George W. Bush to Justice | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
*looks around* Whose gonna throw a shoe THIS time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some from Iraq said he had wmds so it wasn't a lie only acting on misinformation. Approval was given. Obama acted without approval. If you arrest bush you have to arrest Obama Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back. Arrest anyone you want I don't care. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this whole post is stupid...you bush bashers need to crawl back under the rock you came from 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Tue 05/03/11 09:39 PM
|
|
this whole post is stupid...you bush bashers need to crawl back under the rock you came from
Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some from Iraq said he had wmds so it wasn't a lie only acting on misinformation. Approval was given. Obama acted without approval. If you arrest bush you have to arrest Obama Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back. Arrest anyone you want I don't care. lost why? Because you said so and ignore facts? I didn't say arrest Obama. I said if you call arrest Bush you have to call arrest Obama. I don't call arrest Bush so I don't call arrest Obama. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
InvictusV
on
Wed 05/04/11 05:16 AM
|
|
Violation of Requirement for Determination Bush also violated several terms of the resolution. The first violation relates to Section 3(b), which states: "In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall ... make available ... his determination that— (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq;" If Bush had told the truth about Iraq then he would have said Iraq did not pose a threat to America. In that case "diplomatic or other peaceful means" would have given us adequate protection. Bush accused Saddam Hussein of violating the UN Security Council resolutions by not revealing the presence of his WMD. Bush then invaded Iraq without permission from the Security Council. It then became apparent that Iraq did not have WMD. Ironically, therefore, Bush violated the UN resolutions and Iraq did not. Because Bush did not fulfill his obligation to truthfully show the need for the invasion, he did not have authority under HJR114 to invade Iraq. I get a little irritated when a poster copy's and pastes from someone else and doesn't cite the reference. I know this is an informal setting, but it isn't asking that much to follow an academic protocol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some from Iraq said he had wmds so it wasn't a lie only acting on misinformation. Approval was given. Obama acted without approval. If you arrest bush you have to arrest Obama Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back. Arrest anyone you want I don't care. lost why? Because you said so and ignore facts? I didn't say arrest Obama. I said if you call arrest Bush you have to call arrest Obama. I don't call arrest Bush so I don't call arrest Obama. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 05/04/11 08:32 AM
|
|
Some from Iraq said he had wmds so it wasn't a lie only acting on misinformation. Approval was given. Obama acted without approval. If you arrest bush you have to arrest Obama Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back. Arrest anyone you want I don't care. lost why? Because you said so and ignore facts? I didn't say arrest Obama. I said if you call arrest Bush you have to call arrest Obama. I don't call arrest Bush so I don't call arrest Obama. Obama apparently didn't do anything wrong. The other thread won't give him any credit at all for killing Osama Bin Laden, so he is innocent of all charges. He had nothing to do with it according to them. It was already a plan in place by Bush. Hell, Osama probably didn't even know about it until they told him.
Arrest Bush for plotting the assassination of a person in another country and or at the very least ordering the shooting of an unarmed suspect. You can't have it both ways, Obama is either responsible and gets the credit (If you think killing an unarmed Bin Laden was a good thing) Or He is innocent and does not get the blame. So Obama haters, make up your minds. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 05/04/11 08:37 AM
|
|
Violation of Requirement for Determination Bush also violated several terms of the resolution. The first violation relates to Section 3(b), which states: "In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall ... make available ... his determination that— (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq;" If Bush had told the truth about Iraq then he would have said Iraq did not pose a threat to America. In that case "diplomatic or other peaceful means" would have given us adequate protection. Bush accused Saddam Hussein of violating the UN Security Council resolutions by not revealing the presence of his WMD. Bush then invaded Iraq without permission from the Security Council. It then became apparent that Iraq did not have WMD. Ironically, therefore, Bush violated the UN resolutions and Iraq did not. Because Bush did not fulfill his obligation to truthfully show the need for the invasion, he did not have authority under HJR114 to invade Iraq. I get a little irritated when a poster copy's and pastes from someone else and doesn't cite the reference. I know this is an informal setting, but it isn't asking that much to follow an academic protocol. I'm very sorry you are irritated but it's very easy to find the source if you want it. http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/noiraqauthority.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. You can copy a big chunk out of a posting and Google it. Google will return the source, even if it is from a a blog or message board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Violation of Requirement for Determination Bush also violated several terms of the resolution. The first violation relates to Section 3(b), which states: "In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall ... make available ... his determination that— (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq;" If Bush had told the truth about Iraq then he would have said Iraq did not pose a threat to America. In that case "diplomatic or other peaceful means" would have given us adequate protection. Bush accused Saddam Hussein of violating the UN Security Council resolutions by not revealing the presence of his WMD. Bush then invaded Iraq without permission from the Security Council. It then became apparent that Iraq did not have WMD. Ironically, therefore, Bush violated the UN resolutions and Iraq did not. Because Bush did not fulfill his obligation to truthfully show the need for the invasion, he did not have authority under HJR114 to invade Iraq. I get a little irritated when a poster copy's and pastes from someone else and doesn't cite the reference. I know this is an informal setting, but it isn't asking that much to follow an academic protocol. I'm very sorry you are irritated but it's very easy to find the source if you want it. http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/noiraqauthority.html I know its easy to find. Not citing a source that you copied word for word is plagiarism. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not citing a source that you copied word for word is plagiarism. guess you had better run to the police. They are going to want to know about this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not citing a source that you copied word for word is plagiarism. guess you had better run to the police. They are going to want to know about this.
I realize integrity is low on the liberal list of what is important in life, but how fning hard is it to copy the link? It wasn't an issue to copy the text.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't speak for the person whose post you were citing. Perhaps (s)he would like to answer.
realize integrity is low on the liberal list of what is important in life, You have hit on a real zinger, here! As a liberal, I am cut to the core!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The killing of Osama Bin Laden was an assassination. Call it what it is. It was a public assassination, because most assassinations are done secretly, this one was not. Therefore, it was a political move. It was not for "justice." They did not go in there to arrest him for trial, because they could not connect him to 9-11, and all the evidence about him being trained by the CIA would have come out in the trial....not to mention the names of the real perpetrators of 9-11. Interesting..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some from Iraq said he had wmds so it wasn't a lie only acting on misinformation. Approval was given. Obama acted without approval. If you arrest bush you have to arrest Obama Give it up, you lost this argument a few posts back. Arrest anyone you want I don't care. lost why? Because you said so and ignore facts? I didn't say arrest Obama. I said if you call arrest Bush you have to call arrest Obama. I don't call arrest Bush so I don't call arrest Obama. Obama apparently didn't do anything wrong. The other thread won't give him any credit at all for killing Osama Bin Laden, so he is innocent of all charges. He had nothing to do with it according to them. It was already a plan in place by Bush. Hell, Osama probably didn't even know about it until they told him.
Arrest Bush for plotting the assassination of a person in another country and or at the very least ordering the shooting of an unarmed suspect. You can't have it both ways, Obama is either responsible and gets the credit (If you think killing an unarmed Bin Laden was a good thing) Or He is innocent and does not get the blame. So Obama haters, make up your minds. Umm I am talking about his bombing of Libya w/o the approval of congress. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Umm I am talking about his bombing of Libya w/o the approval of congress. Ummmmmmmm Has the International Criminal Court in the Hague heard about this?! How about the Justice Department? The House of Representatives? Somebody should be notified!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 05/04/11 10:33 AM
|
|
Violation of Requirement for Determination Bush also violated several terms of the resolution. The first violation relates to Section 3(b), which states: "In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall ... make available ... his determination that— (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq;" If Bush had told the truth about Iraq then he would have said Iraq did not pose a threat to America. In that case "diplomatic or other peaceful means" would have given us adequate protection. Bush accused Saddam Hussein of violating the UN Security Council resolutions by not revealing the presence of his WMD. Bush then invaded Iraq without permission from the Security Council. It then became apparent that Iraq did not have WMD. Ironically, therefore, Bush violated the UN resolutions and Iraq did not. Because Bush did not fulfill his obligation to truthfully show the need for the invasion, he did not have authority under HJR114 to invade Iraq. I get a little irritated when a poster copy's and pastes from someone else and doesn't cite the reference. I know this is an informal setting, but it isn't asking that much to follow an academic protocol. I'm very sorry you are irritated but it's very easy to find the source if you want it. http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/noiraqauthority.html I know its easy to find. Not citing a source that you copied word for word is plagiarism. Bull crap. Its only plagiarism if I claim to be the author. But if you assume I am claiming that by not posting a link to the source, again, I apologize. Now get over it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A President does not have the power to declare war. Bush went to Congress after 9/11 and bullied them into giving him power that no other President has ever had.
This is balance of power, checks and balances. That is what Bush changed while in office. He used the shock of it all, scare tactics made it 'a terrorist' attack. Turned it into something it never was. You see, we have to be attacked and this is what we were NOT. And Congress knew it, and knowing it they still gave Bush the power to declare war. Now there is no check/balance. It wasn't even that he convinced Congress to declare war, it was that he got them to give him the Power to do so. He used this event, and USED all the American people that knew no better. Bush jr. and Bush Sr. were business partners with bin laden. They have cozy pictures together after their little business deals as far back as when Bush sr. was in power. I'm really not impressed with people who follow others words as if they are truth, absolute truth. If you watch main stream media (TV) News, or log into CNN for your news.. or similar, you are having your news told to you- by people with direction/motivation. It is filtered, it is censored. It is cut down to crap. YOU only see what they want you to see, not the truth. You see the truth, when you find the truth, you have to dig for, it won't be on any tv station or any cnn website. And really people are 2 damn lazy to work for the truth, so they walk around quoting others about something they really know nothing about. And it is ALL LIES. Politicians/Media are ALL BS. So keep believing others stories, following your family, friends, fox news, cnn... those are YOUR lies that keep you 'Patriotic' sidenote: People who quote wiki lose credibility automatically with me, regardless how more or less I agreed in a whole to their subject. Anyone in the waking world that can get on a computer can edit wiki information. At the top of every wiki page is an edit button. YES you could be quoting a 6yr old... Automatic F in college if you Cite wiki- Thanks for your post it was interesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
