Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
They don't know if they're terrorists... I'm sure some are, but they aren't organized, they aren't funded, clearly Al Qaeda grasp is weak when it's own organizational practices can't be seen.
War of aggression would be if America 'invaded' them for no reason. That's not what happened and we had a valid reason.
The U.N Charter, first one, first line.. "To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace"
What they're doing is legal... we don't have to like it, I don't like it... but it is legal.
|
Nato charter does not give them the right to start wars of aggression. It is what they are doing is prejudicial justice. There are dictators killing innocent people everyday. Why isn't Nato attacking them? The only reason was to take control of Libyan oil and set up a central bank.
Really "they dont know" and are "weak"? What do you call a group of people trying to over throw a country?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...bels-in-libya/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...eda-links.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ief-fears.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_842009.html
That my friend is treason. Maybe we should not arm, fund, train, back and fight for people who are trying to kill us and that we are at war with. Man Obama, Clinton and our intelligence must be stupid? I hope not!