Violation of resolution 678

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #90,558 by orion 3/23/03 1:33:29 AM Reply	Violation of resolution 678 [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=90557\|Please read this] explains it in more detail. "Bill gates cannot guarantee Windows, so how are you going to guarantee my safety?" -John Crichton to the Emperor of the Scarrans on [link\|http://www.farscape.com\|FarScape]
Post #90,559 by Brandioch 3/23/03 1:51:46 AM Reply	Lots of detail. Very little applicable. So, we have to kill innocent Iraqis because Saddam has rockets? I notice you've back off of your ORIGINAL position that he had "weapons of mass destruction". In fact, you don't even bother to mention it any more. So, are those rockets worth killing children over?
Post #90,830 by orion 3/23/03 7:22:10 PM Reply	Re: Lots of detail. Very little applicable. Rocket which violate resolution 678, and can be used for long range attacks using nuclear, chemical, or biological payloads. Come on Saddam had 12 years to destroy the things and he did not. They wouldn't use them for short range attacks because it would hit their country and troops and people as well, but they would use them in long range attacks. We are only targeting military targets, not children. I think it is best we end this discussion if you insit on saying we are targeting children. "Bill gates cannot guarantee Windows, so how are you going to guarantee my safety?" -John Crichton to the Emperor of the Scarrans on [link\|http://www.farscape.com\|FarScape]
Post #90,836 by Brandioch 3/23/03 7:41:28 PM Reply	So you don't think children will die in this invasion? Explain why Saddam has not used nuke/chem/bio weapons. Children will die in this invasion. That is the reality. And you are STILL going on about: Rocket which violate resolution 678, and can be used for long range attacks using nuclear, chemical, or biological payloads. The rockets cannot deliver those payloads. Because Saddam does not have those payloads. Dead children. Because Saddam does not have the weapons you claim he has. But don't feel bad. It's not like they were real boys and girls. Just some more rag head gutter snipes. The world's probably better of without them.
Post #90,841 by boxley 3/23/03 7:50:02 PM Reply	yeah, they might get run over by a drunk will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] To a lot of people in California hunting anything but the wild tofualope was equivelent to sacarificing babies to satan. S.M. Stirling
Post #90,886 by orion 3/23/03 9:19:13 PM Reply	I see no further need to continue this conversation "Bill gates cannot guarantee Windows, so how are you going to guarantee my safety?" -John Crichton to the Emperor of the Scarrans on [link\|http://www.farscape.com\|FarScape]
Post #90,891 by mmoffitt 3/23/03 9:28:05 PM Reply	Correction: Children have died already. [link\|http://www.moffitt-tech.com/foo/war.html\|Pointing to a primitive page I put up w/photos of dead Iraqi children BEFORE the war "started"] bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?

Bush wanted a holy war, now he has one... - (cwbrenn) - (39) - March 21, 2003, 04:10:15 PM EST

Bring them on - (orion) - (38) - March 21, 2003, 11:50:09 PM EST

Remember the Ewoks -NT - (altmann) - (5) - March 22, 2003, 12:23:54 AM EST

Wasn't Denzel Washington in that? -NT - (deSitter) - March 22, 2003, 12:46:37 AM EST

Different movie - (orion) - (3) - March 22, 2003, 05:38:38 PM EST

*whoosh* -NT - (altmann) - March 22, 2003, 05:42:20 PM EST

It gets worse. - (marlowe) - (1) - March 23, 2003, 12:45:09 PM EST

You're the one that says they exist. - (Brandioch) - March 23, 2003, 01:39:57 PM EST

September 11th ring a bell? -NT - (Brandioch) - (10) - March 22, 2003, 01:38:07 AM EST

Re: September 11th ring a bell? - (orion) - (9) - March 22, 2003, 05:39:16 PM EST

Re: September 11th ring a bell? - (deSitter) - (6) - March 22, 2003, 05:51:30 PM EST

"Never start a land war in Asia" -NT - (pwhysall) - (5) - March 23, 2003, 08:18:01 AM EST

Next up - Bush tries to outsmart a Sicilan. -NT - (Simon_Jester) - (4) - March 23, 2003, 11:44:20 AM EST

In-con-THEEV-able! -NT - (admin) - (3) - March 23, 2003, 11:54:12 AM EST

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect. -NT - (bepatient) - (2) - March 23, 2003, 12:31:35 PM EST

ObLRPD: Naive is one word for it. -NT - (admin) - March 23, 2003, 12:48:57 PM EST

Is that better than dazzling? -NT - (Ashton) - March 24, 2003, 04:26:39 PM EST

"What is the best that they got, a guy name Mohamed with a j - (Brandioch) - (1) - March 22, 2003, 06:33:01 PM EST

Point well made - (orion) - March 22, 2003, 10:03:54 PM EST

No. - (pwhysall) - (1) - March 22, 2003, 01:53:49 AM EST

Veiled? -NT - (mmoffitt) - March 22, 2003, 08:06:20 AM EST

The POINT, Norm, - (cwbrenn) - (18) - March 22, 2003, 11:30:51 AM EST

Liberal forces in Pakistan, for example.. - (deSitter) - March 22, 2003, 11:33:23 AM EST

My point - (orion) - (16) - March 22, 2003, 05:35:47 PM EST

So where are the nuke/chem/bio attacks? - (Brandioch) - (15) - March 22, 2003, 06:31:20 PM EST

Re: So where are the nuke/chem/bio attacks? - (orion) - (5) - March 22, 2003, 10:07:27 PM EST

"So that is proof that they do have WOMD of some sort." - (Brandioch) - (4) - March 23, 2003, 12:43:27 AM EST

Part of the disarment agreement was to get rid of the SCUDs - (orion) - (3) - March 23, 2003, 01:28:19 AM EST

And Molly tore that apart already. - (Brandioch) - (2) - March 23, 2003, 02:03:09 AM EST

If the $100B were spent on eduction.. - (Ashton) - (1) - March 23, 2003, 03:45:05 AM EST

Exactly. -NT - (Brandioch) - March 23, 2003, 11:04:10 AM EST

Please read - (orion) - (8) - March 22, 2003, 11:36:55 PM EST

I read that. Now, show me where it mentions chem/bio. -NT - (Brandioch) - (7) - March 23, 2003, 12:42:57 AM EST

Violation of resolution 678 - (orion) - (6) - March 23, 2003, 01:33:29 AM EST

Lots of detail. Very little applicable. - (Brandioch) - (5) - March 23, 2003, 01:51:46 AM EST

Re: Lots of detail. Very little applicable. - (orion) - (4) - March 23, 2003, 07:22:10 PM EST

So you don't think children will die in this invasion? - (Brandioch) - (3) - March 23, 2003, 07:41:28 PM EST

yeah, they might get run over by a drunk -NT - (boxley) - March 23, 2003, 07:50:02 PM EST

I see no further need to continue this conversation -NT - (orion) - March 23, 2003, 09:19:13 PM EST

Correction: Children have died already. - (mmoffitt) - March 23, 2003, 09:28:05 PM EST

iwethey.org

Just having a rest between bars...
108 ms