or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Saddam: no evidence of Genocide
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Saddam: no evidence of Genocide - Page 2

post #41 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
CM ( sigh ) haven't you read the rest of the thread???????

I was refering to the fact that why should the UN be a concern to consevatives in this matter since Bush thumbed his nose at the UN over starting this war. And yes it's a fact!

Read the rest of the thread before commenting next time.

Perhaps you are right, but I am not a conservative. I think rules should be fairly applied to all involved. So, please quit reading YOUR thoughts and values into what I write.

So if you think it is not an issue, then quit bringing up the UN/Global view on SH/Iraq/US. I think the UN has made itself irrelevant by making backdoor deals with ruthless dictators all while proclaiming to be the answer to piece for the world. New york should turn the UN into low income housing or something, that would do the same amount of good the UN is doing right now.

As long as the left embrace the UN the UN is an issue. As long as the UN continually tries to undermine the US' authority, the UN is an issue.

Stop with the reverse psychology. It won't work.
post #42 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Perhaps you are right, but I am not a conservative. I think rules should be fairly applied to all involved. So, please quit reading YOUR thoughts and values into what I write.

So if you think it is not an issue, then quit bringing up the UN/Global view on SH/Iraq/US. I think the UN has made itself irrelevant by making backdoor deals with ruthless dictators all while proclaiming to be the answer to piece for the world. New york should turn the UN into low income housing or something, that would do the same amount of good the UN is doing right now.

As long as the left embrace the UN the UN is an issue. As long as the UN continually tries to undermine the US' authority, the UN is an issue.

Stop with the reverse psychology. It won't work.


This isn't just your thoughts. One of the main arguments of the right concerning this war is the idea that Saddam ignored the UN. Bush did this also so how is one right and the other wrong?

By the way I was replying to Common Man not you. Does this mean you are CM also?

Either way this is a black and white issue and concept.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #43 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
This isn't just your thoughts. One of the main arguments of the right concerning this war is the idea that Saddam ignored the UN. Bush did this also so how is one right and the other wrong?

By the way I was replying to Common Man not you. Does this mean you are CM also?

Either way this is a black and white issue and concept.

please. No-one here follows the rule you imply exists. If that was true then you and giant and pflam and others are all the same person.

It's not black and white. SH ignored the UN for 13 years. SH subverted the UN for most of that period. SH used chemical weapons against his own people. SH filled mass graves during the period that the UN was observing it. SH ruled over his people using force and murder. SH ignored 70+ resolutions against him.

Are you actually trying to compare SH/Iraq with GWB/USA?
post #44 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
please. No-one here follows the rule you imply exists. If that was true then you and giant and pflam and others are all the same person.

It's not black and white. SH ignored the UN for 13 years. SH subverted the UN for most of that period. SH used chemical weapons against his own people. SH filled mass graves during the period that the UN was observing it. SH ruled over his people using force and murder. SH ignored 70+ resolutions against him.

Are you actually trying to compare SH/Iraq with GWB/USA?

It's not a rule it's a fact!

Bush ignored the UN when it didn't want him to go to war. Now it turns out the main premise for him to be in such a hurry he had to ignore the UN wasn't true at all.

There is NO facts supporting the idea that saddam ignored the UN for all of 13 years as you say because when we got over there no WOMD were to be found.
Besides the inspectors were saying the same thing for a long time before the war.

No Nappy, your arguments once again just don't hold water ( or much else ). I'm my own person ( are you ? ). I couldn't hold a candle to Giant's posts or his insight. I'm not anyone else because I don't have anything to hide ( do you? ).

There are many people who think as I do. Deal with it.

I'd compare Bush to Saddam due to all the questionable material that surrounds him.

No, I can't speak for any of the others here as to whether they have more than one handle but I'm it. However after your response to my comments aimed at CM ( and your reaction just now ) I kind of wonder.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #45 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
It's not a rule it's a fact!

Bush ignored the UN when it didn't want him to go to war. Now it turns out the main premise for him to be in such a hurry he had to ignore the UN wasn't true at all.

There is NO facts supporting the idea that saddam ignored the UN for all of 13 years as you say because when we got over there no WOMD were to be found.
Besides the inspectors were saying the same thing for a long time before the war.

No Nappy, your arguments once again just don't hold water ( or much else ). I'm my own person ( are you ? ). I couldn't hold a candle to Giant's posts or his insight. I'm not anyone else because I don't have anything to hide ( do you? ).

There are many people who think as I do. Deal with it.

I'd compare Bush to Saddam due to all the questionable material that surrounds him.

No, I can't speak for any of the others here as to whether they have more than one handle but I'm it. However after your response to my comments aimed at CM ( and your reaction just now ) I kind of wonder.

WOW you are ignorant. Please prove me wrong by listing all the conditions placed on Saddam by the UN.
post #46 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
WOW you are ignorant. Please prove me wrong by listing all the conditions placed on Saddam by the UN.

It's easy to say " You're ignorant ". Tell me how I'm wrong bucko. I know that some claim that Saddam had WOMD before the war. The facts just don't support that. That's the main excuse for the war. There might have been other things but no WOMD. Bush did ignore the UN's wishes about going to war however. On the one hand it's wrong for Saddam to ignore the UN's wishes but on the other it's ok for Bush to do that. Come on Scott that's just ignorant in itself.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #47 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
It's easy to say " You're ignorant ". Tell me how I'm wrong bucko. I know that some claim that Saddam had WOMD before the war. The facts just don't support that. That's the main excuse for the war. There might have been other things but no WOMD. Bush did ignore the UN's wishes however. Provide proof please.

WRONG. Bush provided many reasons for the war. The WMD thing was only emphasized when we went to the UN. They were totally uninterested in the mass murders and human rights violations, we had to sell them with the crappy WMD intel that we had. Surely you see the irony in that.

Just like the UN you ignore the sheer humanitarian tragedy of the situation. Removing SH was the right thing to do. Lack of stockpiles of WMD doesn't change that fact. Even this tsunami hasn't reached the number of dead at his hands. here I'll post it again:

http://massgraves.info/
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/iraq0503/

weapons programs... check
mass graves... check
intent to resume WMD production at earliest date... check
corrupt government... check
connection to terrorism... check
banned weapons... check

From the UN speech:

"In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge."

Let me break it down for your "progressive" mind to comprehend - SH did not provide proof of disposal, without it there is no verifiable way to be sure he had done so. But wait! The UN was inspecting, right? Well gee, haven't we learned that the UN was then on the take? Yep, sure was. Not only that, how many times had they been kicked out? How many times did they claim he circumvented and derailed the process?

For a comparison, how long has it taken to verify the same thing in Libya?

There were many reasons to remove SH, and intellectually honest people can't pick only one of those reasons to base their disapproval of this war on, when the majority of reasons were proven true. Your radicalism prevents you from facing facts.

Not only that, another reason (if not reasons) has been and are continually being revealed during the course of the war.

In addition, all of the evidence has not even been touched, for the sheer amount of it all. You seem ever willing to call it before all of the facts are in. Which by the way, is a hallmark of you and your fellow "progressives".

I have noticed that your position has slipped a bit so maybe there is hope for you, after all.

When all the evidence is in, I predict that "progressives" like yourself will be shameful of their former stance.
post #48 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
we had to sell them with the crappy WMD intel that we had.

LMAO. You forgot the part about "selling" that same BS to the American people. Because of course, no one from this Admin. repeated the "mushroom cloud", "imminent threat" rhetoric ad nauseum everywhere they went( SoU included).
post #49 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
WRONG. Bush provided many reasons for the war. The WMD thing was only emphasized when we went to the UN. They were totally uninterested in the mass murders and human rights violations, we had to sell them with the crappy WMD intel that we had. Surely you see the irony in that.

Just saving this one for posterity.
post #50 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
WRONG. Bush provided many reasons for the war. The WMD thing was only emphasized when we went to the UN. They were totally uninterested in the mass murders and human rights violations, we had to sell them with the crappy WMD intel that we had. Surely you see the irony in that.

Just like the UN you ignore the sheer humanitarian tragedy of the situation. Removing SH was the right thing to do. Lack of stockpiles of WMD doesn't change that fact. Even this tsunami hasn't reached the number of dead at his hands. here I'll post it again:

http://massgraves.info/
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/iraq0503/

weapons programs... check
mass graves... check
intent to resume WMD production at earliest date... check
corrupt government... check
connection to terrorism... check
banned weapons... check

From the UN speech:

"In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge."

Let me break it down for your "progressive" mind to comprehend - SH did not provide proof of disposal, without it there is no verifiable way to be sure he had done so. But wait! The UN was inspecting, right? Well gee, haven't we learned that the UN was then on the take? Yep, sure was. Not only that, how many times had they been kicked out? How many times did they claim he circumvented and derailed the process?

For a comparison, how long has it taken to verify the same thing in Libya?

There were many reasons to remove SH, and intellectually honest people can't pick only one of those reasons to base their disapproval of this war on, when the majority of reasons were proven true. Your radicalism prevents you from facing facts.

Not only that, another reason (if not reasons) has been and are continually being revealed during the course of the war.

In addition, all of the evidence has not even been touched, for the sheer amount of it all. You seem ever willing to call it before all of the facts are in. Which by the way, is a hallmark of you and your fellow "progressives".

I have noticed that your position has slipped a bit so maybe there is hope for you, after all.

When all the evidence is in, I predict that "progressives" like yourself will be shameful of their former stance.

Boy talk about delusional! Sigh! Once again the only reason that matters is the one that sold america on this war the threat of WOMD. He may have said something else but that's the only one that made this war possible. We know that Naples. It's not just rhetoric. It's fact. He knew what the public and his peers would think and he ran with it.

The weapons inspectors at the time said there weren't any WOMD.

Read my lips Nappy. THEY AREN'T GOING TO FIND THEM.

Deal with it.

My position on this has never slipped once.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #51 of 76
New mass graves found:

http://www.dawn.com/2004/12/30/top12.htm

This will go on for 10 years, IMO.
post #52 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
New mass graves found:

http://www.dawn.com/2004/12/30/top12.htm

This will go on for 10 years, IMO.

why do you care?

they're all Muslims anyway, you can't convert them to 'the truth', they're spiritually deceived by Satan, and they're rapidly growing in numbers and are a direct threat to the established Christian orthodox faith.

Dont pretent you think the world would be better off if 300,000 of the 'sworn enemy' were still alive.
post #53 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
why do you care?

they're all Muslims anyway, you can't convert them to 'the truth', they're spiritually deceived by Satan, and they're rapidly growing in numbers and are a direct threat to the established Christian orthodox faith.

Dont pretent you think the world would be better off if 300,000 of the 'sworn enemy' were still alive.

I think you should check yourself. I don't feel the way you assert.

You are showing your lack of intellect and civility.

Now would be a good time to stop, IMO.
post #54 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think you should check yourself. I don't feel the way you assert.

You are showing your lack of intellect and civility.

Now would be a good time to stop, IMO.

I'm sorry, this kind of talk should only happen on Sunday mornings within the confines of the church walls. I should only speak in hushed tones to people I trust hold the same values as me. Shhhh, I'll keep the secret, if you will.....
post #55 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
I'm sorry, this kind of talk should only happen on Sunday mornings within the confines of the church walls. I should only speak in hushed tones to people I trust hold the same values as me. Shhhh, I'll keep the secret, if you will.....

Dude, you can have whatever opinion you like. But please don't assert that I hold some view based on your opinion. You do this all the time and you wonder why you can't get through to people.

Well, that's why.
post #56 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
you wonder why you can't get through to people.


Why dont you start a poll.

option 1) NaplesX usually hits the nail on the head and I usually agree with his arguments, logic and rational thought

option 2) MarcUK usually hits the nail on the head and I usually agree with his arguments, logic and rational thought

option 3) NaplesX and MarcUK are both complete idiots.

DARE YA! (if you're lucky, you might get Frank and Common Man to vote for you)
post #57 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
New mass graves found:

http://www.dawn.com/2004/12/30/top12.htm

This will go on for 10 years, IMO.

Maybe we should go on a hunt around the world to find all of the mass graves tyrants have created in recent times ( those particular ones are believed to be from 1991 ). Then maybe it might put it in perspective for you.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #58 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
All we really have is giant's assertion that the wikipedia.org account is all wrong. That shouldn't surprise anyone, since the wikipedia account is actually balanced and provides ample support for the notion that Iraq was responsible.

The wikipedia article is not balanced and is indeed wrong, containing both clear factual errors as well as misrepresenting pelletiere's position. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether Iraq was responsible, and the wikipedia article contains little of the important info on the incident. You clearly didn't read anything I posted and instead just responded like an asshole.
post #59 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
The wikipedia article is not balanced and is indeed wrong. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether Iraq was responsible, and the wikipedia article contains little of the important info on the incident. You clearly didn't read anything I posted and instead just responded like an asshole.

Hey look Giant called someone a name!

Oh wait... that;s nothing new.

Carry on.
post #60 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Maybe we should go on a hunt around the world to find all of the mass graves tyrants have created in recent times ( those particular ones are believed to be from 1991 ). Then maybe it might put it in perspective for you.

Hey look Jimmac is justifying bad behavior with other bad behavior!

Oh wait. That's isn't at al unusual.

Carry on.
post #61 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
please. No-one here follows the rule you imply exists. If that was true then you and giant and pflam and others are all the same person.

It's not black and white. SH ignored the UN for 13 years. SH subverted the UN for most of that period. SH used chemical weapons against his own people. SH filled mass graves during the period that the UN was observing it. SH ruled over his people using force and murder. SH ignored 70+ resolutions against him.

And....if he really did, it was on the the tacit approval of the Reagan and Bush SR administrations. Is that OK, Naples?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #62 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
And....if he really did, it was on the the tacit approval of the Reagan and Bush SR administrations. Is that OK, Naples?

I would love to debate this with you, but you will have to agree that ALL past presidents and their decisions be included in the debate. It seems to this poster that bringing up certain presidents who happen to be democrat, that things instantly get ugly.

Unless we agree to keep it civil (yeah right) and to allow this stipulation, we should probably avoid the resulting malay by sticking to this president as has been the unwritten rule in these corners.
post #63 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Hey look Jimmac is justifying bad behavior with other bad behavior!

Oh wait. That's isn't at al unusual.

Carry on.


You know what I meant! Why pick just this one? Now you're just being childish.

Count on Nappy for the low blow.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #64 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
It's easy to say " You're ignorant ". Tell me how I'm wrong bucko. I know that some claim that Saddam had WOMD before the war. The facts just don't support that. That's the main excuse for the war. There might have been other things but no WOMD. Bush did ignore the UN's wishes about going to war however. On the one hand it's wrong for Saddam to ignore the UN's wishes but on the other it's ok for Bush to do that. Come on Scott that's just ignorant in itself.

It's easy to say you're ignorant because you display it here. You said Saddam was not ignoring the UN? Well don't be so ignorant. Go look at ALL of the conditioning the UN placed on him. Otherwise STFU because you are ignorant.
post #65 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
[B]I would love to debate this with you, but you will have to agree that ALL past presidents and their decisions be included in the debate. It seems to this poster that bringing up certain presidents who happen to be democrat, that things instantly get ugly.

All past presidents? You mean Wilson, or FDR? Saddam Hussein came to power in Iraq during the second half of the Carter Administration, but the major US support for Saddam Hussein and his thugs didnt kick in until the Iran-Iraq war started in 1980, and continued throughout the entire two terms of Reagan and then the first half of G. Bush Sr., until a few months before Iraq invaded Kuwait. I didn't deliberately miss the $point by making a partisan issue of this.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
It's easy to say you're ignorant because you display it here. You said Saddam was not ignoring the UN? Well don't be so ignorant. Go look at ALL of the conditioning the UN placed on him. Otherwise STFU because you are ignorant.

Uh, no I didn't say that! What do you think this part meant? : " There might have been other things but no WOMD."

There were other items but they really weren't the reason this war got everybody's approval. If the american public knew there were no WOMD before the war we wouldn't be there now. There would have been so much opposition it would have made the protests that happened look like a county fair! Also the rest of the world wouldn't have been behind it. Bush knew this.

What I was saying ( though not directly ) is that Saddam didn't ignore the UN about the WOMD. It's obvious that he did his best to get rid of them. He knew the consequences. I really don't think he wanted us to attack and he knew that was the item that could make it happen.

I was asking the question : Why is it wrong for Saddam to ignore the UN and ok for Bush to do so? Because the UN wanted to try other things and not rush into war. Bush went ahead anyway against their wishes. Once again the only item that made this possible without a lot more opposition was the threat of the nonexistent WOMD.

This effectively of negates the argument about Saddam ignoring the UN because Bush did that also. You can't have it both ways no matter what the circumstances were.

Evidently your reading comprehension is very low. Also you act like a child Scott. You really do.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #67 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Uh, no I didn't say that! What do you think this part meant? : " There might have been other things but no WOMD."

There were other items but they really weren't the reason this war got everybody's approval. If the american public knew there were no WOMD before the war we wouldn't be there now. There would have been so much opposition it would have made the protests that happened look like a county fair! Also the rest of the world wouldn't have been behind it. Bush knew this.

What I was saying ( though not directly ) is that Saddam didn't ignore the UN about the WOMD. It's obvious that he did his best to get rid of them. He knew the consequences. I really don't think he wanted us to attack and he knew that was the item that could make it happen.

I was asking the question : Why is it wrong for Saddam to ignore the UN and ok for Bush to do so? Because the UN wanted to try other things and not rush into war. Bush went ahead anyway against their wishes. Once again the only item that made this possible without a lot more opposition was the threat of the nonexistent WOMD.

This effectively of negates the argument about Saddam ignoring the UN because Bush did that also. You can't have it both ways no matter what the circumstances were.

Evidently your reading comprehension is very low. Also you act like a child Scott. You really do.

You wont get *anywhere* putting a logical argument in front of Scott. He will regurgitate the same weary claptrap, while clearly demonstrating that he has not the remotest idea that the difference between "anti American" and "anti Bush" sentiment is of galactic proportions....many would say...almost 180º in opposition.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #68 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
You wont get *anywhere* putting a logical argument in front of Scott. He will regurgitate the same weary claptrap, while clearly demonstrating that he has not the remotest idea that the difference between "anti American" and "anti Bush" sentiment is of galactic proportions....many would say...almost 180º in opposition.

I know that but I'm compelled to right a wrong anyway.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #69 of 76
While Bushie and his war-mongerers now base the entire Iraq war on UN resolutions not respected by Iraq, here is a list of many resolutions a partner of the USA did not comply with, and they overweight both in number, and seriousness any UN resolution relating Iraq.

How 'bout we "smoke 'em up" too, for not complying with UN resolutions?


The List:


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992


1. Resolution 106: "... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"


2. Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"


3. Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"


4. Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"


5. Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"


6. Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"


7. Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"


8. Resolution 248: "...'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"


9. Resolution 250: "... 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in

Jerusalem"


10. Resolution 251: "... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"


11. Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"


12. Resolution 256: "... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation"


13. Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"


14. Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"


15. Resolution 265: "... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"


16. Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"


17. Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern

Lebanon"


18. Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on

Jerusalem"


19. Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"


20. Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"


21. Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"


22. Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"


23. Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"


24. Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"


25. Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in

Lebanon"


26. Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"


27. Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"


28. Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"


29. Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


30. Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon'


31. Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"


32. Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


33. Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"


34. Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"


35. Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"


36. Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"


37. Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"


38. Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians" 39. Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


40. Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'


41. Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'


42. Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"


43. Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"


44. Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"


45. Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"


46. Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"


47. Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and

unconditionally from Lebanon"


48. Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"


49. Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and

demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


50. Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in

Lebanon"


51. Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"


52. Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters


53. Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"


54. Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops" 55. Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians


56. Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly

requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention


57. Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"


58. Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians


59. Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians


60. Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount


61. Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United

Nations


62. Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of

Palestinians


63. Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return


64. Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians


65. Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.



And this list does not include Resolutions blocked by the US with their Veto power in the Security Council, as well as any other Resolutions post-1992.

Read and ponder friends.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #70 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by Gene Clean
While Bushie and his war-mongerers now base the entire Iraq war on UN resolutions not respected by Iraq, here is a list of many resolutions a partner of the USA did not comply with, and they overweight both in number, and seriousness any UN resolution relating Iraq.

How 'bout we "smoke 'em up" too, for not complying with UN resolutions?


The List:


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992


1. Resolution 106: "... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"


2. Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"


3. Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"


4. Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"


5. Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"


6. Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"


7. Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"


8. Resolution 248: "...'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"


9. Resolution 250: "... 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in

Jerusalem"


10. Resolution 251: "... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"


11. Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"


12. Resolution 256: "... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation"


13. Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"


14. Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"


15. Resolution 265: "... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"


16. Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"


17. Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern

Lebanon"


18. Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on

Jerusalem"


19. Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"


20. Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"


21. Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"


22. Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"


23. Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"


24. Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"


25. Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in

Lebanon"


26. Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"


27. Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"


28. Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"


29. Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


30. Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon'


31. Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"


32. Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


33. Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"


34. Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"


35. Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"


36. Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"


37. Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"


38. Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians" 39. Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


40. Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'


41. Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'


42. Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"


43. Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"


44. Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"


45. Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"


46. Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"


47. Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and

unconditionally from Lebanon"


48. Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"


49. Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and

demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


50. Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in

Lebanon"


51. Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"


52. Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters


53. Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"


54. Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops" 55. Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians


56. Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly

requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention


57. Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"


58. Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians


59. Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians


60. Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount


61. Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United

Nations


62. Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of

Palestinians


63. Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return


64. Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians


65. Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.



And this list does not include Resolutions blocked by the US with their Veto power in the Security Council, as well as any other Resolutions post-1992.

Read and ponder friends.


Thank you! My point exactly!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #71 of 76
To be fair to the UN, and to thus prove it's own fairness, should not there be the same or comparable number of declarations against the Palestinian government.

Or will there be a lack of such declarations?

If such a discrepancy exists, it this because the "not a nation" loophole exists?

Doesn't that raise a red flag in your "progressive" brain?
post #72 of 76
Since you bring it up how many are there condemning Arafat and his terrorist ways against Israel? I'll start the bidding at zero.

Quote:
Originally posted by Gene Clean
While Bushie and his war-mongerers now base the entire Iraq war on UN resolutions not respected by Iraq, here is a list of many resolutions a partner of the USA did not comply with, and they overweight both in number, and seriousness any UN resolution relating Iraq.

How 'bout we "smoke 'em up" too, for not complying with UN resolutions?


The List:


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992


1. Resolution 106: "... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"


2. Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"


3. Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"


4. Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"


5. Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"


6. Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"


7. Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"


8. Resolution 248: "...'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"


9. Resolution 250: "... 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in

Jerusalem"


10. Resolution 251: "... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"


11. Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"


12. Resolution 256: "... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation"


13. Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"


14. Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"


15. Resolution 265: "... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"


16. Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"


17. Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern

Lebanon"


18. Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on

Jerusalem"


19. Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"


20. Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"


21. Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"


22. Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"


23. Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"


24. Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"


25. Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in

Lebanon"


26. Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"


27. Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"


28. Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"


29. Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


30. Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon'


31. Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"


32. Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


33. Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"


34. Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"


35. Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"


36. Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"


37. Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"


38. Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians" 39. Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"


40. Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'


41. Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'


42. Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"


43. Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"


44. Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"


45. Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"


46. Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"


47. Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and

unconditionally from Lebanon"


48. Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"


49. Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and

demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"


50. Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in

Lebanon"


51. Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"


52. Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters


53. Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"


54. Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops" 55. Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians


56. Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly

requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention


57. Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"


58. Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians


59. Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians


60. Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount


61. Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United

Nations


62. Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of

Palestinians


63. Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return


64. Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians


65. Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.



And this list does not include Resolutions blocked by the US with their Veto power in the Security Council, as well as any other Resolutions post-1992.

Read and ponder friends.
post #73 of 76
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Since you bring it up how many are there condemning Arafat and his terrorist ways against Israel? I'll start the bidding at zero.

Err...never mind....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #74 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Err...never mind....

So the count is still at zero?
post #75 of 76
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
So the count is still at zero?

How about you respond to that original point that UN sanctions somehow obligated invading Iraq but sanctions have no merit in regard to Israel.

Oh, that's right. You don't respond to points, you just derail and troll.

Because, frankly, you're not smart enough to keep up.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #76 of 76
It really doesn't matter how many resolutions. This isn't tit for tat. The point is that Saddam isn't the only one who has gone against the UN's wishes in this matter. Dubbya is in the group also. Hence Saddam ignoring the resolutions isn't a good enough justification for the war. The one that mattered as it was the most advertised and motivating apparently he complied with since there were no WOMD to be found. So no valid, approved of ahead of time justification for the war.


That's pretty much it in a nutshell.


I know the Bush supporters would like to say " Well it's already happened " and sweep it under the rug and forget.


That's just not going to happen.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Saddam: no evidence of Genocide