Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?

Eric Chomko wrote:

The UN should be happy that it didn't get involved in our mess.



The ones who are probably laughing themselves silly are the French; we
followed them into Vietnam, but they were smart enough not to follow us
into Iraq.

Pat

"Eric Chomko" wrote:

:On Jan 22, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: (Rand Simberg) wrote:
:
: :
: :Here's a challenge, to anyone, but particularly to those who think
: :that the UN's definition of genocide is valid and useful. Does anyone
: :here think that it would be possible to get the UN to declare what's
: :happening in Iraq by that word?
:
: That's got nothing to do with the facts one way or the other.
:
: What it's possible to get the UN to do doesn't have a lot to do with
: reality. If it did, there would have been a UN Security Council
: Resolution to invade Iraq.
:
:Based upon what?

Based upon its own prior resolutions.

--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Eric Chomko" wrote:

:On Jan 22, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: (Rand Simberg) wrote:
:
: :
: :Here's a challenge, to anyone, but particularly to those who think
: :that the UN's definition of genocide is valid and useful. Does anyone
: :here think that it would be possible to get the UN to declare what's
: :happening in Iraq by that word?
:
: That's got nothing to do with the facts one way or the other.
:
: What it's possible to get the UN to do doesn't have a lot to do with
: reality. If it did, there would have been a UN Security Council
: Resolution to invade Iraq.
:
:Based upon what?

Based upon its own prior resolutions.

Fred, the UN specifically stated that they found no WMD in Iraq. Bush
ignored that and tried to create his own intel that Iraq tried to get
WMD material from Niger. That didn't work and we have one of his
minions in court right now related to that ruse. And yes Libby up on
perjury charges is a small issue related to the bigger issue of
whether Bush invaded Iraq under false pretense.

For you to claim that Bush and the UN were on the same page WRT in
early 2003 is either a bold face lie or a case of naivety. You're not
naive, are you Freddy?

Eric


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

"Eric Chomko" wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: "Eric Chomko" wrote:
:
: :On Jan 22, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: :
: : :
: : :Here's a challenge, to anyone, but particularly to those who think
: : :that the UN's definition of genocide is valid and useful. Does anyone
: : :here think that it would be possible to get the UN to declare what's
: : :happening in Iraq by that word?
: :
: : That's got nothing to do with the facts one way or the other.
: :
: : What it's possible to get the UN to do doesn't have a lot to do with
: : reality. If it did, there would have been a UN Security Council
: : Resolution to invade Iraq.
: :
: :Based upon what?
:
: Based upon its own prior resolutions.
:
:Fred, the UN specifically stated that they found no WMD in Iraq.

Later. You apparently went to sleep during that particular period of
time. It's the only way I can explain the idiotic conclusions you
come to.

:Bush
:ignored that and tried to create his own intel that Iraq tried to get
:WMD material from Niger.

False. Do try to learn what actually went on before you make such
stupid claims.

:That didn't work and we have one of his
:minions in court right now related to that ruse.

Wrong. This is merely misrepresentation of the facts.

:And yes Libby up on
erjury charges is a small issue related to the bigger issue of
:whether Bush invaded Iraq under false pretense.

Which has already been subject to Congressional investigation and
found to be a bull**** claim.

:For you to claim that Bush and the UN were on the same page WRT in
:early 2003 is either a bold face lie or a case of naivety.

Where did I say that, Eric? You **REALLY** need to learn to read.

--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Eric Chomko" wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: "Eric Chomko" wrote:
:
: :On Jan 22, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: :
: : :
: : :Here's a challenge, to anyone, but particularly to those who think
: : :that the UN's definition of genocide is valid and useful. Does anyone
: : :here think that it would be possible to get the UN to declare what's
: : :happening in Iraq by that word?
: :
: : That's got nothing to do with the facts one way or the other.
: :
: : What it's possible to get the UN to do doesn't have a lot to do with
: : reality. If it did, there would have been a UN Security Council
: : Resolution to invade Iraq.
: :
: :Based upon what?
:
: Based upon its own prior resolutions.
:
:Fred, the UN specifically stated that they found no WMD in Iraq.

Later. You apparently went to sleep during that particular period of
time. It's the only way I can explain the idiotic conclusions you
come to.

Yes, and rather than attack me you provide a citation, right? Oh
that's right you DID attack me and provided no citation. So when you
kiss ass for the govt. does that not constitute lying in that
Machiavellian brain of yours?

:Bush
:ignored that and tried to create his own intel that Iraq tried to get
:WMD material from Niger.

False. Do try to learn what actually went on before you make such
stupid claims.

That is not what many claim and understand right now. No one in the US
wants Bush to be brought up on war criminal charges except the very
far left and others that truly hate him. However, when he is out of
office he'll get no kid-glove treatment by historians and the media
when it comes to the Iraq invasion. Mark my words!


:That didn't work and we have one of his
:minions in court right now related to that ruse.

Wrong. This is merely misrepresentation of the facts.

Is it really?

:And yes Libby up on
erjury charges is a small issue related to the bigger issue of
:whether Bush invaded Iraq under false pretense.

Which has already been subject to Congressional investigation and
found to be a bull**** claim.

It is not over yet. And that congressional investigation was the last
congress and was prior to the Libby trial. Let's see what Karl Rove
has to say.


:For you to claim that Bush and the UN were on the same page WRT in
:early 2003 is either a bold face lie or a case of naivety.

Where did I say that, Eric? You **REALLY** need to learn to read.

Oh, then what did you say? Why act coy, McClod?

Eric


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

More deluded lying from El Chimpko.

No need to read further. I certainly didn't.

"Eric Chomko" wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: "Eric Chomko" wrote:
:
: :
: :Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : "Eric Chomko" wrote:
: :
: : :On Jan 22, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: : :
: : : :
: : : :Here's a challenge, to anyone, but particularly to those who think
: : : :that the UN's definition of genocide is valid and useful. Does anyone
: : : :here think that it would be possible to get the UN to declare what's
: : : :happening in Iraq by that word?
: : :
: : : That's got nothing to do with the facts one way or the other.
: : :
: : : What it's possible to get the UN to do doesn't have a lot to do with
: : : reality. If it did, there would have been a UN Security Council
: : : Resolution to invade Iraq.
: : :
: : :Based upon what?
: :
: : Based upon its own prior resolutions.
: :
: :Fred, the UN specifically stated that they found no WMD in Iraq.
:
: Later. You apparently went to sleep during that particular period of
: time. It's the only way I can explain the idiotic conclusions you
: come to.
:
:Yes, and rather than attack me you provide a citation, right? Oh
:that's right you DID attack me and provided no citation. So when you
:kiss ass for the govt. does that not constitute lying in that
:Machiavellian brain of yours?
:
: :Bush
: :ignored that and tried to create his own intel that Iraq tried to get
: :WMD material from Niger.
:
: False. Do try to learn what actually went on before you make such
: stupid claims.
:
:That is not what many claim and understand right now. No one in the US
:wants Bush to be brought up on war criminal charges except the very
:far left and others that truly hate him. However, when he is out of
ffice he'll get no kid-glove treatment by historians and the media
:when it comes to the Iraq invasion. Mark my words!
:
:
: :That didn't work and we have one of his
: :minions in court right now related to that ruse.
:
: Wrong. This is merely misrepresentation of the facts.
:
:Is it really?
:
: :And yes Libby up on
: erjury charges is a small issue related to the bigger issue of
: :whether Bush invaded Iraq under false pretense.
:
: Which has already been subject to Congressional investigation and
: found to be a bull**** claim.
:
:It is not over yet. And that congressional investigation was the last
:congress and was prior to the Libby trial. Let's see what Karl Rove
:has to say.
:
:
: :For you to claim that Bush and the UN were on the same page WRT in
: :early 2003 is either a bold face lie or a case of naivety.
:
: Where did I say that, Eric? You **REALLY** need to learn to read.
:
:Oh, then what did you say? Why act coy, McClod?
:
:Eric
:
:
: --
: "You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
: your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
: -- Mark Twain

"Charles Buckley" wrote in message
...

Now, if Bush's current hostile stance towards Iran leads to a
shooting war, then there will be some serious doubts as to
the provocation of such a war. His current rules of engagement
are almost designed to lead to an escalation incident. An outright
bombing of Iranian oil platforms or other targets would be very
questionable.

But is there any limit to what the AmeriKKKan sheeple will put up with?
America lost its ideas with the (mostly) failure of Shays' Rebellion. We
ended up with a totalitarian central government that promised a modern, less
regressive, more modern form of fuedalism lite where people are less unfree
than anywhere else in the world. Now that the central government has
consolidated its power with wacky precedents, people have nowhere else to go
(California settled, other nations more unfree), and this monster has no
real competitor (Cold war over), do you really think anyone with any
influence is going to question an unprovoked attack when we've been fooled
AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN by the same jack-booted thugs that invaded Mexico
and Spain before the previous century even started?

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:56:04 -0700, in a place far, far away, Charles
Buckley made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


Now, if Bush's current hostile stance towards Iran

What planet are you posting this from, and what color is the sky
there?

Planet: Earth

Color of Sky: Violet (blue is merely a perception of the "human" eye)