I wonder why the UN wouldn't help the US in Iraq

[AEB]

Article

I just hope they dont get away with it. All the non-superpowers use the UN to try and dictate US policy, this is something very few people understand. They wouldn't have helped us in Iraq becasue they were making too much money.

 

[Red Dawn]

Maybe they realized that it would make a bad situatiuon worse which seems to be the case.

 

[jpeyton]

Because they knew there were no WMD, even though that was our prime justification for going in.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Maybe they realized that it would make a bad situatiuon worse which seems to be the case.

Maybe if they had helped the situation wouldn't be as bad.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Maybe they realized that it would make a bad situatiuon worse which seems to be the case.

Maybe if they had helped the situation wouldn't be as bad.

A valid point. A good reason now to seek their help now to rectify the situation or at least lessen the severity of it.

 

[Stunt]

Maybe if they had helped the situation wouldn't be as bad.

You see, you guys fvcked up...so you have to fix it.
When you go to war unilaterally, that is exactly what you get...

Are you surprised by this?...hehe

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Maybe they realized that it would make a bad situatiuon worse which seems to be the case.

Maybe if they had helped the situation wouldn't be as bad.

Maybe if we would have let the inspecters finish the Job and Werent Running around saying well invade reguardless what the UN says and the inspectors find we might have Got more invlolved and the situation wouldn't be as bad.

But Were the ones with the uncontrollable raging Hard-on so now we have to Take Care of the Baby.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: AEB
Article

I just hope they dont get away with it. All the non-superpowers use the UN to try and dictate US policy, this is something very few people understand. They wouldn't have helped us in Iraq becasue they were making too much money.

invading another country borders the distiction of being a US policy, it becomes an international crisis conserning a whole lot more countries than just the US.

If China says, hey taiwan has wmd's and are ready to use them against china and so on. When the US tries to say hold on hold on, should china just say hey screw you us this is china's policy. According to your theory the US should just butt out and ignore it since its a "policy".

 

[AEB]

The UN is good at passing lots of resolutions threataning countries, but they never do anything. Keep in mind the UN was asked for help but because of the oil-for-food program the nations heavily invested (france, germany,etc) wouldnt give help. You guys act like we just dove in, there was an effoft for support (some was recieved by smaller nations NOT being corrupted by blood money) and we gave saddam a window to leave.

Focus on the corruption! its horrible we are letting the UN dictate our policies! Id rather us not goto war for reasons AMERICANS choose not becasue we dont get support from the UN, that is them controlling us!

 

[GrGr]

Why did the US want to invade Iraq?

 

[AEB]

Thats not the point start a new thread.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: AEB
Article

I just hope they dont get away with it. All the non-superpowers use the UN to try and dictate US policy, this is something very few people understand. They wouldn't have helped us in Iraq becasue they were making too much money.

Maybe we should wait for the results of the investigations before we make conclusions or judgement calls?

Besides, I don't see you drawing conclusions from the fact that American and Brittish individuals were also on this list of benefactors which you seem to be citing from.

 

[AEB]

But America wasnt willing to let saddam continue defying the UN resolutions in exchange for money, the rest were.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: lozina
[Besides, I don't see you drawing conclusions from the fact that American and Brittish individuals were also on this list of benefactors which you seem to be citing from.

Which Americans are those? Is it the two Arabs that live in America?

Is the Brit you're speaking of the British Lord that was vehemently anti-Blair and anti-war?

 

[jackschmittusa]

Seems to me that because the U.N. inspecters said there were no WMD, and it was obvious that Sadaam was contained, they saw no necessity for war.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: AEB
But America wasnt willing to let saddam continue defying the UN resolutions in exchange for money, the rest were.

Another assumption?

Also, what makes you think that the names on that list from some of the European countries have any influence on their countries foreign policy ?

 

[AEB]

The UN inspectors didnt say that, they said they didnt find any weapons but they also had a lot that were not accounted for. Keep in mind saddam was able ton control where they went and when. There were 3 sources of intell that said they had WMD AND all the UN resolutions that were passed saddam HAD violated so war was justifiable to the UN.

They are dictatin american foreign policy , i cant belive everyone is cool with that. WE can decide it at home if you dont like it elect kerry or nader, dont let the UN choose

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: AEB
But America wasnt willing to let saddam continue defying the UN resolutions in exchange for money, the rest were.

so the US in the sake of upholding UN resolutions invades Iraq and brakes the UN charter while doing so?

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: AEB
Id rather us not goto war for reasons AMERICANS choose not becasue we dont get support from the UN, that is them controlling us!

Yeah, me too !!!

American support for Iraq war

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: AEB
But America wasnt willing to let saddam continue defying the UN resolutions in exchange for money, the rest were.

So we invade because we were not getting a fair slice of profit off the Iraqi oil.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: AEB
The UN inspectors didnt say that, they said they didnt find any weapons but they also had a lot that were not accounted for. Keep in mind saddam was able ton control where they went and when. There were 3 sources of intell that said they had WMD AND all the UN resolutions that were passed saddam HAD violated so war was justifiable to the UN.

They are dictatin american foreign policy , i cant belive everyone is cool with that. WE can decide it at home if you dont like it elect kerry or nader, dont let the UN choose

War was not justified by UN resolutions, we have gone over this on the forum. No UN resolution about Iraq allowed war.

and I ask you again, if China invades Taiwan and says its their foreign policy, would you just shutup and accept that?

 

[AEB]

*SIgh* the war is justified Start a new thread and i will tell you why.
Otherwise focus on the fin issue at hand corrupt foreign bodies controlling our nations, i am sad to see i am the only one botherd by it.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: AEB
*SIgh* the war is justified Start a new thread and i will tell you why.
Otherwise focus on the fin issue at hand corrupt foreign bodies controlling our nations, i am sad to see i am the only one botherd by it.

How can I say I am bothered by a bee sting when I don't have a bee sting?

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: AEB
*SIgh* the war is justified Start a new thread and i will tell you why.
Otherwise focus on the fin issue at hand corrupt foreign bodies controlling our nations, i am sad to see i am the only one botherd by it.

fine I'll start a new thread
I am asking you both, if china invaded taiwan and said it was their foreign policy, would you shutup about it?

 

[AEB]

Start it


and if you dont see it Iozina you need help