Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Splum
1. Dont play word games, even Democrats have declared "police actions" and such to skirt around the issue of who can and cannot send troops to battle. Fact is any President can and often does authorize military action without any oversight.
|
Wow! You should pick a side and stick with it.. You said in your last post,
".... (well we must be attacked of course)."
Word games? You're the one that referenced the link..
Quote:
|
2. Iraq violated UN security resolutions for years(on top of violating cease fire agreements with the USA as well)and there was an order AUTHORIZING the use of force against Iraq if it did not comply. Dont give me this shit about WMD because they didnt have to actually HAVE the WMD to violate the resolution, it also states that Iraq must not SEEK WMD either.
|
Funny how the UN violation is used as an excuse to attack, yet Bush can just ignore the UN's majority vote to send the inspectors back.
And he also ignored the 182-4 vote in favor of a Cuban resolution demanding the US end its unilateral and extra-territorial blockade.
I guess Bush is the only one that allowed to ignore the UN..
And when did I give you any shit about WMD? Never even brought up..