Anti-War 100,000 - Pro-War 400

Romans 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

The powers that be are ordained of God. Really? So when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq all those years, gassing the Kurds and doing all those horrible things he did, with Reagan/Bush's approval, he did those things with power ordained by God.

When Hitler started World War II he did it with power ordained by God. When george W Bush lied the country into an unnecessary war he did that with power ordained by God.

When George W Bush illegally invaded and overthrew the government of Iraq he removed a power ordained of God.

When you bashed Bill Clinton while he was president you bashed a power ordained of God.

Should we obey human or divine law?

What part of infallible don't you understand?

The fairy tale called the Bible contains more than 1,200 contradictions. Does seem very infallible now does it?

 

Good point yo-yo.

 

I just found the solution for both the death penalty and the war in Iraq!

Simply send those on death row over to Iraq hooked up to one of these http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9816703/

btw for those who can't take a joke, get a life in advance as i'm not being serious

 

caseagainstbush,

Bush technically didn't lie, he said what he knew.

But that doesn't matter, there were so many reasons to liberate Iraq that it doesn't count if it was the biggest of all lies.

Anyway, the WMD have been removed or well hidden, just as for Saddam's fighter jets.

Can you tell me where they were at the start of the war and where they are now?

I would really appreciate some solid info on that subject.

Thanks.

 

I see it as an embelishment of the facts at the very least, which could equate to a lie in many peoples opinions.

Actually it does as WMD's and fear are what gave him the power to attack and the US population behind him.

That 'might' be but is yet to be proven. Alot of speculation, I would not doubt if there were some moved but nothing I've read thus far show actual WMD being moved. Reports of 'thinking' it was, but no real evidence.

I know thist wasn't asked of me, but I felt the overwhelming need to respond

 

So bascially you are saying we failed, thats what you are saying, we invaded the country to get the wmd out of terrorist hands, and we have lost them into terrorist hands

 

I'd like one of those for my wife. Our house might actually get cleaned once in a while!

 

It may also come in handy on those nights she has a 'headache'

j/k and ducking at the same time

 

Says the guy who spends half his days asleep on the couch

 

The fact that the only good reason to invade a country such as Saddam's Iraq is because of the presence of WMD is nonsense. If they chose to put it that way it's because nobody or almost could not argue.

The whole point, you see, is that he wasted too much time with UN, the most corrupt worldwide organization in the world.

I could say exactly the same thing, but do you agree with me that at least Saddam had WMD, that he used them to kill thousands, that he had enough base chemicals to produce more thatn what he used.
Put it this way, if you were Saddam, what would you have done with WMD as you realized that war was inevitable? Kept them in the cellar below? Get caught with them? Put yourself in that position? Reinforce Bush's position at the same time? Attract hate and anger from even more people including those that denied the chance of Saddam having them stocked in the country whether or not ready for use?
In the mean time I can tell you what I would have done, that is get rid of them, either sell them at a cut price or leave them temporarily in one of his friends or allies or whatever, donate them to the same or destroy them.

And you people?

Thanks hrbl for the debate it's always a pleasure.

 

Basically yes, I didn't say that but I would if asked.
Far too much time was wasted with the UN, but I guess he had to, thanks to the obstruction from the countries which had too much to loose without Saddam, again I name them: the governements of France, Russia, Germany and China, and others...plus those that say to the US and the UK just because it's them or because they are cowards.

In brief, yes we failed and I hope we learn from that mistake and I hope Iran and Syria keep that in mind.

 

I don't disagree on you there, we however were told that was the primary driving force which is my main complaint on the process.

Yet we used the 'UN' as reason to invade, those same people we wasted time with.

Wow lots of speculation, no facts. If I were him with his 'insane' mad man ways I would have kept them to use on the invading force who was coming to destroy my army and take me out of power. They 'could be there' they 'could have existed' they 'could have been moved' that still doesn't dispute on many far reaches the admin made for the case of war in a time of 'terror' using 'terror' and the uninformed americans fears to justify the war.

 

Thanks for the Rep Red--quess i push someone button to darn "HARD".

 

Let's imagine a case when police has arrested some one for murder, there is no body, there is no gun, there is no bloody clothes or any other evidence.
The prosecutor tell the jury, if you were a murderer and knew that you were going to be arrested, would you keep the body, the gun, the clothes or any other evidence?
Of course not and the fact that we have no proof against this guy, proves that he is a murderer.
Do you think the jury should convict the guy based on that argument?

 

It wasn't me, make a good thought out post and I may give you some green to make up for it.

Debate is the place if you want red, or try helping someone you may get it as well

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=403144&postcount=18

 

I just gave you a green. Red-rep is used by morons who don't have arguments. That is the reason it is so popular with Gtech gang.

 

First of all:

are you comparing the US and the UK to the police? That's quite an acknowledgement

And:

Many well known murderers get away because of many reasons, the same thing would have happened here. Of course he still can be prosecuted for other reasons as well and after all you can't spend more than one life in jail (...and at that age).

So if you're comparing Saddam to a simple murderer......

I'll ask you question:

did you know he didn't have any WMD?

 

I don't know if he had or he didn't have.

You can not prove a negative. It is not possible to prove that he didn't have, the burden of proof is on those that say he had WMD.

This is the reason our justice system is built on innocent until proved guilty and NOT on guilty until proved innocent.

To make it even more clear, so even you can understand:

You are driving in your car, police stops you for speeding and tells you that you must prove that you were not driving too fast. Can you do that? NO and that is the reason the police has to prove that you were driving too fast.

 

Were in the rule book did this come from--if you can prove that this is a fact than i will agree. Infact i wasn't helping nobody just giving my feelings on his statement----