Federal Court rules in favour of U.S. war resister
- Thread starter tay
- Start date
Read this March 7, 2003 report by chief UN weapon inspector, Hans Blix:
Security Council 7 March 2003
Then read President Bush's March 18, 2003 declaration of war:
Full text: Bush's speech | World news | guardian.co.uk
Everything found in Iraq since the time of Blix's March 7, 2003 report confirms the accuracy of Iraq's December 2002, 12,000 page WMD declaration to the UNSC and Blix's report while proving that Bush's March 18, 2003 justifications for war were lies and misinformation.
Bush's speech is full of lies and misinformation justifying an unprovoked illegal war which killed 30,000 Iraqi soldiers in the first weeks, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and made millions of people homeless over the next decade.
Bush isn't just a liar, he's also a mass murdering war criminal. Anyone who supports what the US did to the Iraqi people is no different than those who supported other mass murdering war criminals. Any American soldier who did not want to be an accessory to Bush's war crimes and crimes against humanity should have been welcomed to Canada.
Last edited:
I thought even you would be bright enough to recognize sarcasm without purple ink.
Big dummy. When was the Declaration of War?
This coming from the one who relishes and enjoys the slaughtering of Jews... particularly Jewish children and women.
Honestly... do you think I care what they think of us? LOL. Not a bit.
This coming from the pedophile who likes diddle little boys?
(you want to make up crap about me, then I can make it up right back)
(you want to make up crap about me, then I can make it up right back)
Instead slowly but surely they are coming home... either on their own or by the good Canadians who see them for what they are... DESERTERS.
Coming home to face a jury of their peers and receive their DISHONORABLE DISCHARGES. LMAO
Typical low life hypocrite. You can dish it but can't take it.
Who really care if they get a dishonorable discharge or not? Unless you were career army it has no effect on your life.
Am I right that you believe an intel screw up led to war?
Am I also right that on March 18, 2003 and for some time afterward you believed that iraq was a WMD threat and that Iraqis were involved in the events of 9/11?
Tell the truth because I will research your posts and quote you.
Finding no evidence supporting Bush's justifications for war means that I can keep rubbing American faces in this war crime until Americans admit they were deceived into war and hold the people responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousand of Iraqis accountable fpor their crimes.
BTW, I do not hold American soldiers responsible for following orders to go to war with Iraq. The responsibility lies with those at the top who abused their authority to turn American soldiers into poorly paid mercenaries fighting to increase the profitability of big oil corporations.
Last edited:
You can't be serious TS.
A Dishonorable Discharge carries huge ramifications. Life long consequences. Basically they are felons. I do not know how it is up in Canada if you are discharged dishonorably but in the US they are finished. It goes on their record that will pop up whenever they apply for a job. All state, federal, municipal jobs are closed. All veterans benefits are denied, they cannot ever vote, nor have a firearms permit, getting a loan is almost impossible. Oh man... I wouldn't want one.
Really? Let me see; Iraq was started because on the basis of a pile of lies, Yugoslavia was a NATO peacekeeping action against a tyrant bent on genocide and there were no fabrications involved (no genocidal actions in Iraq and it definitely wasn't a peacekeeping action), and Libya was a retaliation aimed directly at the country involved in killing Americans (Iraq was more like blind retaliation at whatever country seemed handy to lash out at).
See my reply. In case you hadn't noticed, Canada and the USA are pals.
If you weren't avoiding anything then you obviously missed the entire point.
Oh, I got the picture about desertion. You can't seem to get the picture about the difference between legalities and justice. They are decidedly not the same thing.
As I said, according to Hitler, murdering Jews, gypsies, and whomever else was perfectly legal. It was certainly not justice, though.
Wrong. The legal issue of desertion will be done. Justice would not be served.
Wrong. Liar.
Go ahead idiot and come back and apologize.
I will be waiting your apology.
You're missing the point. YOU LG... YOU say that justice will not be done. I say that it is a matter of opinion and justice WILL be done.
I cannot WAIT!
........... puppet. Right.
The people tugging on the strings were Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Powell.
The war in Libya was in retaliation for Libya killing Americans? When... in the 80's?
No genocide in Iraq?
You can't be serious.
Hey big mouth... how is that research coming?
I didn't miss the point but you are right, it's a matter of opinion. My opinion is based upon clear differences between what is legal and what is just, your opinion isn't.
Isn't that what you were referring to?
Nope. Genocide had nothing to do with the decisions made by Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Powell that guided Bush. Hussein did not pick and choose who to murder based upon race.
Here's a bit about the decision-making:
http://home.comcast.net/~lionelingr... Decision-Making Process and the Iraq War.pdf
lol It's pretty tough being serious when I'm still humored about your inability to figure out the difference between what is just and what is legal, but yes, seriously.
I know you keep saying that but you are of the opinion that if you think a conviction for desertion is unfair then you think an injustice has been done. I say a conviction for desertion is both legal AND just.
It reminds me of a family whose son was convicted of murder here in Massachusetts a few years back. His bloody finger prints were everywhere and when he was sentenced to life his crazy family went nuts saying justice was not served. It was amusing to watch... as this is.
Oh no Petros... it was about stopping a tyrant that killed Americans. Suddenly people got a conscious when their General was in charge of the carpet bombing of Libya.
Good Al Queda remember?
Jeeeezez. When the reason the guy deserted in the first place is because of shifty decision-making in the first place, yup, action against him is not just. But it is legal.
Irrelevant and not even close to being a decent example of legality/justice.
Legally, OJ Simpson got off (the prosecution sucked). According to justice, he didn't (because of the civil actions). That's another example of the difference.
That's no excuse. Who's he to decide? He signed the contract. Free will. He was no draftee.
Sorry LG... keep floundering.
LOL. Sure it is! Better than your moose analogy for starters.
Anyways... it's a Merry Go Round at this point.
When he comes home he'll be tried and convicted and given a Dishonorable Discharge. Then he can spend his life whining about how he's a victim like every other felon.
Ahhhh... but many will say he's innocent and disagree with you.
Is it becoming clear now? Finally?
I sincerely apologize to Eaglesmack for claiming that he is one of millions of Americans who believed that Saddam Hussein was behind the events of 9/11. His post in 2008, claims he never fell for that lie.
Example:
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/u...400-how-many-dead-kids-enough.html#post916597
However in 2003, about 45% of Americans believed that Hussein was "personally involved" in the events of September 11:
A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.
The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
However ES did write this:
The UN also laid out the rules in which Saddam's regime had to follow and he snubbed his nose at everything. The US took him to task for it while the UN waffled.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/72396-u-s-soldiers-seeking-refugee-2.html#post938800
Perhaps ES can clarify. Iraq's December 2008 declaration was accurate and complete. Hussein allowed UN weapon inspectors to talk to anyone and go anywhere both in 2003 and in 1998. Was Hussein snubbing his nose at the UN in 2003 when the US declared war? If so, then how?
IN 1998, the US advised UN weapon inspectors to leave Iraq before they bombed the place using intell illegally gathered by UN weapon inspectors who abused their access to Iraq to collect intel on Iraq's legal weapon systems, command and communication infrastructure:
http://fair.org/take-action/action-alerts/spying-in-iraq-from-fact-to-allegation/
Hussein didn't let the UN weapon inspector return, because they were no longer acting as weapon inspectors.
Once the UN reorganized UNSCOM into UNMOVIC and provided guarantees that the new UN weapon inspectors would not be Western spies, Hussein let them return.
Also explain this sarcasm regarding Hussein/Iraqi:
He was abiding by all of the UN restrictions and was working towards a peaceful solution. He is a great loving leader... a hero to to all oppressed nations. He loved his people. He was such a kind and gentle leader.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...llegal-war-before-illegal-war.html#post563615
Iraq was disarmed of WMDs by 1998 and was compliant with all UN restrictions by March 2003 when the US invaded.
Regarding Bush's lies about Iraq's WMDs:
I don't think he lied but I think he was mistaken.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/87188-congratulation-president-obama-16.html#post1396758
So I don't take back what i said regarding ES being fooled by the Bush administrations deliberate lies regarding Iraq's WMD threat. I believe ES believed the lies at the time of the war. Even now I suspect he doesn't believe the Bush administration deliberately lied and deceived Americans into supporting an unprovoked war with Iraq. ES still thinks it was an intel failure.
Example:
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/u...400-how-many-dead-kids-enough.html#post916597
However in 2003, about 45% of Americans believed that Hussein was "personally involved" in the events of September 11:
A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.
The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
However ES did write this:
The UN also laid out the rules in which Saddam's regime had to follow and he snubbed his nose at everything. The US took him to task for it while the UN waffled.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/72396-u-s-soldiers-seeking-refugee-2.html#post938800
Perhaps ES can clarify. Iraq's December 2008 declaration was accurate and complete. Hussein allowed UN weapon inspectors to talk to anyone and go anywhere both in 2003 and in 1998. Was Hussein snubbing his nose at the UN in 2003 when the US declared war? If so, then how?
IN 1998, the US advised UN weapon inspectors to leave Iraq before they bombed the place using intell illegally gathered by UN weapon inspectors who abused their access to Iraq to collect intel on Iraq's legal weapon systems, command and communication infrastructure:
http://fair.org/take-action/action-alerts/spying-in-iraq-from-fact-to-allegation/
Hussein didn't let the UN weapon inspector return, because they were no longer acting as weapon inspectors.
Once the UN reorganized UNSCOM into UNMOVIC and provided guarantees that the new UN weapon inspectors would not be Western spies, Hussein let them return.
Also explain this sarcasm regarding Hussein/Iraqi:
He was abiding by all of the UN restrictions and was working towards a peaceful solution. He is a great loving leader... a hero to to all oppressed nations. He loved his people. He was such a kind and gentle leader.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...llegal-war-before-illegal-war.html#post563615
Iraq was disarmed of WMDs by 1998 and was compliant with all UN restrictions by March 2003 when the US invaded.
Regarding Bush's lies about Iraq's WMDs:
I don't think he lied but I think he was mistaken.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/87188-congratulation-president-obama-16.html#post1396758
So I don't take back what i said regarding ES being fooled by the Bush administrations deliberate lies regarding Iraq's WMD threat. I believe ES believed the lies at the time of the war. Even now I suspect he doesn't believe the Bush administration deliberately lied and deceived Americans into supporting an unprovoked war with Iraq. ES still thinks it was an intel failure.
Last edited: