The U.S/Israel leaders

Post Reply New Topic

There are a lot of other issues, such as the massive civilian casualties. Also, the Iraq war was a preemptive war, as sanctioned by the Bush Doctrine, but preemptive wars are quite plainly illegitimate under international law and violate treaties to which the US is a signatory. Thus, the invasion of Iraq was almost certainly illegal, notwithstanding Hussein's failure to comply with UN sanctions.

Anyways, how would you be reacting if the UN weapons inspectors wanted access to all our military facilities? You'd be up in arms about how the UN is not a legitimate governing body and has no sovereignty over the US and shouldn't boss us around.


Yeah, they did. You know where they got those WMDs? They bought them from us during the Iran-Iraq war. They got rid of most of them (perhaps all, we don't have perfect data) in the 90s. There is no good evidence that they had an active nuclear program in 2003, and yet the nuclear threat was cited as the main justification for invasion.

In any case, I think there are much more iron-clad examples of illegal behavior on the part of the Bush administration. I mean, at a stretch you could try to say the Iraq war was a horrible, idiotic mistake but not actually a criminal act. The justification of torture, the illegal wiretapping, etc are all significantly more black-and-white and would be easier to prosecute.

Well if you look at my original post I do propose we look at this situation as if Al Qaeda is indeed guilty.

\

No I did not start this thread to stir up anything. This is the crux of my point. Forget about conspiracy theories. The US invaded Iraq based on the fact that they believed Iraq possessed "weapons of mass destruction". We all know that this was just a lie. So now what? Do we just accept it as an error in judgment? Oh no it was just a mistake, sorry for wrongfully invading your country and killing thousands of civilians. How can something like this just be swept under the carpet? Doesn't someone have to pay for this "error"?

If it was any country other than the U.S, the knives would have been out immediately. Whether you want to agree with me or not.


As far as this being a touchy subject no one, holds back when it's time to roast other peoples beliefs. No one seems to think that it offends people when others attack Islam. But it's ok to attack Islam because it's the religion of choice for terrorists. But to say anything bad about US officials is wrong. Double Standards.

And why's that? Because I don't believe something that I'm told to believe?

No one gets the point of this thread. There are some nations who are immune to any retribution after wrongs. Can anyone truly tell me that I am wrong? Israel and the US can get away with murder, and no one can say a thing. You know this is true. Don't try and change the subject by pointing out other pointless facts.

And take this scenario. Which country in the Middle East has the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons? Israel.

What if Iran decided to invade Israel on the premise that it possessed weapons of mass destruction? Even though it is a fact that they do possess these weapons, there would be a huge outcry that Iran has no right to attack a country who has shown to force towards it. How can Iran just invade a country on any whims and fancies?

So what does that tell you? That only the US can just go invading countries for no apparent reason. If anyone else does it, it's wrong. You know this to be true. The US is a super power. It can do whatever it pleases. Other countries on the other hand are subject to rules and regulations. The US is a democracy, there intentions are always good.

Whether you want to agree with me or not. You know this is true.

No, it's because you believe something that is an absolutely ridiculous conspiracy. The way you phrased that also implies that I only don't believe the conspiracy because I blindly accepted the government's account. That could not be further from the truth. One of my previous obsessions was disasters. The 9/11 atrocities were included in this interest, so I looked up all the information I could get my hands on. After all of this, including reading and evaluating the number of conspiracies one at a time, I came to the conclusion that, as South Park put it, the attacks were carried out by "a bunch of pissed-off Muslims."

I'm sure there are people who believe the Earth is flat who are just as smugly certain that everyone who disagrees only does so because they're all sheep who refuse to open their eyes and really look at the world around them. I'm also sure that these people are just as wrong. Why am I so sure? Not because "the man" told me what to think. It's because I looked at the supposed evidence supporting their position and found it sadly lacking.

As for the supposed immunity to retribution, I can truly tell you that you are also wrong there. Yes, the nations with power and the friends of those nations are currently above any punishment. But they are not immune; to say that they are immune is to say that they will never be in a position to be punished. Unless you can give me a reason to believe that the U.S. will always be the world's foremost military power, I can truly say you are wrong.

I saw that speech. Colin Powell took no oath. He just spoke. There is no oath making and oath taking in the U.N.

ruveyn

Why don't you try to make a point against any of the points I make? Like how this can go unpunished? You're obviously trying to use sarcasm without actually facing my point.

That's exactly what he did. You said "How can he lie under oath and not get punished?" Ruveyn said "Powell was not under oath."

The same Muslims who live in a cave, can't speak a word of English, have little to no education and whose only means of transport is a scooter? Please. Who benefited most from Sept 11? Theses pissed off Muslims? How can anyone be able to outfox every intelligence party of the US on one seemingly random day? It's as if the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense decided to take a holiday on the very random day the above pissed off Muslim decided to attack.

But again you're missing the point. Forget about the conspiracy theories. Why don't you answer this...

That's exactly what he did. You said "How can he lie under oath and not get punished?" Ruveyn said "Powell was not under oath."[/quote]

Oh so if you lie and it's not under oath, it's ok then? I see.

Why can't anyone face the facts. If it was any country other than the US that used the foreign policy it did after Sept 11, there would have been an outcry.

No one can dispute that.

Oh so if you lie and it's not under oath, it's ok then? I see.

Why can't anyone face the facts. If it was any country other than the US that used the foreign policy it did after Sept 11, there would have been an outcry.

No one can dispute that.[/quote]

I can see that I'm not getting through to anyone. Just remember, if you're American, it's your civil liberties that were taken away for an act Al Qaeda were supposed to have committed.

This site is full of people with DOUBLE STANDARDS. How Ironic just like the US leaders.

Mohammed Atta: studied architecture at Cario University, then continued his studies at the Technical University of Hamburg. He was the leader of the hijackers on American Airlines flight 11.

Abdulaziz al-Omari: Earned a degree from Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud University. Was also on flight 11.

Marwan al-Shehhi: enrolled in a language institute until he learned enough German (meaning he spoke three languages). He then got a scholarship to a military university. He was the leader of the hijackers on United Airlines flight 175.

Hani Hanjour: Studied English at the University of Arizona and at Holy Names College, and had spent extensive time in the U.S. He was the leader of the hijackers on American Airlines flight 77.

Majed Moqed: Was studying law at King Fahd University before he dropped out to join Al-Qaeda. He was also on flight 77.

Ziad Jarrah: Studied aerospace engineering at the Fachhochschule (University of Applied Sciences) in Hamburg. He was the leader of the hijackers on United Airlines Flight 93.

Yes, there were some hijackers with little education, but there was at least one university-educated hijacker on every flight to coordinate the others.

As for the "lived in a cave," 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Here's a picture of Riyadh (just the link, picture would be distracting): http://i46.tinypic.com/66iw49.jpg

How can anyone be able to outfox the intelligence services? The same way the people behind the 1993 WTC attack, Timothy McVeigh, Osama bin Laden, a Puerto Rican nationalist group, Hezbollah, and the Libyan government were able to. The CIA has limited resources, it can't be everywhere watching everyone. Were the attacks these groups carried out all conspiracies too?

As for the thread's subject, I already answered that. The US is currently above punishment because it is the world's premier power. However, it is not immune to punishment, as there is no guarantee it will always be in the position of power.



I didn't say "He wasn't under oath, so it's perfectly all right." Lying is not okay, but since he was not under oath, it was not a punishable offense, and you asked how he could go unpunished. That's the answer.

Maybe lying in front of the General Assembly is not punishable but isn't falsely going into war an act of crime?


As far as the hijackers go, you are only strengthening my point. If you know so much about them, how could not be able to see they were planning an attack?

If Al Qaeda were really behind the attacks they would have been cave dwelling, illiterate, scooter driving militants.

But they were not. If you watch both documentaries I gave a link to, you will see that these hijackers were funded and trained in the US. Just because the hijackers were not US citizens doesn't mean that the US were not in on it.


As for the thread's subject, I already answered that. The US is currently above punishment because it is the world's premier power. However, it is not immune to punishment, as there is no guarantee it will always be in the position of power.

There, you just proved my point. Some countries can do as they feel and others can't. To hell with those innocent parties who find themselves in the middle. Based on this fact, the leaders I mentioned above should be charged with war crimes, not just against the people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, but to all the soldiers who lost their lives making certain of the elite much richer. Thank you for saying what is right. I appreciate it.

The vast majority of that information was pieced together after the attacks. It's just like when Seung-Hui Cho massacred students at Virginia Tech. Nobody in authority knew who he was, but after the attack, his identity was discovered and confirmed, and then his entire history was pored over to see what caused him to commit that atrocity.

The hijackers' identities were uncovered after the attacks; then investigators were able to use their names to find information like their date of entry, location of entry, where they left from, where they lived, who their families were, where they studied, etc. It's not like the CIA had all this sitting in files on September 10th.

Your "cave-dwelling illiterates" argument is absolutely ridiculous. Do you have any idea how Al-Qaeda is financed? Since 9/11, the CIA has seized over $265 million in assets linked to Al-Qaeda. It is much more than a bunch of guys sitting in caves making IEDs. It is a multinational network that has millions of dollars in laundered money to finance its operations.