The United States Of America...Does Not Torture.

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
I dont know. you tell us. You are the one that is so quick to point out UN rules when it comes to America.

tell us what the UN rules said about Saddam and the no fly zones.

I know what they didn't say. They didn't say we could fly over 2000 sorties dropping over 600 bombs on over 300 pre-selected targets and tell the world we were just doing no-fly zone enforcement without ever mentioning the sorties. This, along with the revelations in DSM, make Bush a war criminal for Crimes against Humanity.

No-fly zone enforcement is strictly air-to-air. They fly in the zone, we intercept, and run them out of the zone. If they don't leave, we shoot them down. So what's up with the 600 bombs?

It even said in DSM, that we tried to provoke Hussein and he wouldn't take the bait. Dude, open your eyes and man-up to the truth.

 

[ProudAmerican]

I know what they didn't say. They didn't say we could fly over 2000 sorties dropping over 600 bombs on over 300 pre-selected targets and tell the world we were just doing no-fly zone enforcement without ever mentioning the sorties. This, along with the revelations in DSM, make Bush a war criminal for Crimes against Humanity.

No-fly zone enforcement is strictly air-to-air. They fly in the zone, we intercept, and run them out of the zone. If they don't leave, we shoot them down. So what's up with the 600 bombs?

It even said in DSM, that we tried to provoke Hussein and he wouldn't take the bait. Dude, open your eyes and man-up to the truth.

more clear proof you fully support America.

ever think that maybe, just MAYBE our pilots were fired on by ground sites and had to retaliate?

nahhh, that couldnt be.

boy for an American supporting military lover, you sure are quick to take up for the other side.

so, what did the UN rules say again?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

He fired on our planes because we were...Are you saying they don't have a right to defend themselves?

That's total bullshit, we were bombing the **** out of them because they were firing on our planes in direct violation of the no fly zone which alone was enough to justify the invasion of Iraq per the U.N. cease fire agreement of '91. You have your time frame backwards buddy.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I know what they didn't say. They didn't say we could fly over 2000 sorties dropping over 600 bombs on over 300 pre-selected targets and tell the world we were just doing no-fly zone enforcement without ever mentioning the sorties. This, along with the revelations in DSM, make Bush a war criminal for Crimes against Humanity.

No-fly zone enforcement is strictly air-to-air. They fly in the zone, we intercept, and run them out of the zone. If they don't leave, we shoot them down. So what's up with the 600 bombs?

It even said in DSM, that we tried to provoke Hussein and he wouldn't take the bait. Dude, open your eyes and man-up to the truth.

Ah wanna ****ing bet? The sorties only started after Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors and fired on our aircraft in the no-fly zones, he was in direct violations of the U.N. resolutions of the '91 cease fire agreement which alone gave us the right to invade Iraq.

And go pander your DSM bullshit to people stupid enough to actually believe the proven forgery.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Ah wanna ****ing bet? The sorties only started after Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors and fired on our aircraft in the no-fly zones, he was in direct violations of the U.N. resolutions of the '91 cease fire agreement which alone gave us the right to invade Iraq.

And go pander your DSM bullshit to people stupid enough to actually believe the proven forgery.

the only people he believes have to follow UN rules are Americans. everyone else is exempt.

 

[Davo]

That's total bullshit, we were bombing the **** out of them because they were firing on our planes in direct violation of the no fly zone which alone was enough to justify the invasion of Iraq per the U.N. cease fire agreement of '91. You have your time frame backwards buddy.

If it's a no fly zone...what were you guys doing there? :|

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

If it's a no fly zone...what were you guys doing there? :|

God you can't be this ignorant. It was a no-fly zone for the Iraqi's, set up by the U.N., and guarded by the U.S. airforce to protect the Shi'ites and the Kurds from Saddam Hussein's retallitory air-strikes for the uprisings.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
more clear proof you fully support America.

ever think that maybe, just MAYBE our pilots were fired on by ground sites and had to retaliate?

nahhh, that couldnt be.

boy for an American supporting military lover, you sure are quick to take up for the other side.

so, what did the UN rules say again?

Your scenario doesn't wash. These were "Pre-selected Targets!" Your scenario requires our pilots to be flying through doing routine reconnaissance. That couldn't of possibly been the case if you already have a target in mind and you are flying over there to specifically drop a bomb.

Now, answer the god-damn question, PA! Do they, or do they not, have a right to defend themselves?

Answer me........

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Davo
Iraq fired on your planes? Proof? So have Sudanese militias, the Russian army, Cuba and you havent started a war with any of them. Really you can do better then..."We were spying on them...and they shot at us."

It wasn't so much spying as it was trying to provoke a war with Hussein.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
That's total bullshit, we were bombing the **** out of them because they were firing on our planes in direct violation of the no fly zone which alone was enough to justify the invasion of Iraq per the U.N. cease fire agreement of '91. You have your time frame backwards buddy.

Not according to Leuitenant-General Moseby.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
Ah wanna ****ing bet? The sorties only started after Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors and fired on our aircraft in the no-fly zones, he was in direct violations of the U.N. resolutions of the '91 cease fire agreement which alone gave us the right to invade Iraq.

And go pander your DSM bullshit to people stupid enough to actually believe the proven forgery.

Why do you keep saying things you can't prove? DSM was not from some whacko-lefty with an agenda. It was from someone high up in the British government that SUPPORTED Bush!

The dude was pro-Bush!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
the only people he believes have to follow UN rules are Americans. everyone else is exempt.

Didn't your parents teach you not to lie? Why don't you post anything of mine that would allow you to draw that conclusion? Anything!

 

[Billo_Really]

Sorry, TOT, I was wrong!

As it turns out, Moseby was a Lieutenant-General. But it was the "civil war" when he served his country.

Originally posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
That's total bullshit, we were bombing the **** out of them because they were firing on our planes in direct violation of the no fly zone which alone was enough to justify the invasion of Iraq per the U.N. cease fire agreement of '91. You have your time frame backwards buddy.

Originally posted by billo
Not according to Leuitenant-General Moseby.

So sorry, my bad.

The actual source that you infered was bullshit, is Leuitenant-General Moseley, who was in charge of the air-command that ordered the sorties. Which makes him a credible source on this subject. So for those who have the urge, saying Moseley is not a credible source (or saying what he says is bullshit) is like saying Thomas Edison is not a good source to comment on the light bulb. Think about that as you read on...

General admits to secret air war
Michael Smith

THE American general who commanded allied air forces during the Iraq war appears to have admitted in a briefing to American and British officers that coalition aircraft waged a secret air war against Iraq from the middle of 2002, nine months before the invasion began.

Addressing a briefing on lessons learnt from the Iraq war Lieutenant-General Michael Moseley said that in 2002 and early 2003 allied aircraft flew 21,736 sorties, dropping more than 600 bombs on 391 “carefully selected targets” before the war officially started.

The nine months of allied raids “laid the foundations” for the allied victory, Moseley said. They ensured that allied forces did not have to start the war with a protracted bombardment of Iraqi positions.

If those raids exceeded the need to maintain security in the no-fly zones of southern and northern Iraq, they would leave President George W Bush and Tony Blair vulnerable to allegations that they had acted illegally.

Moseley’s remarks have emerged after reports in The Sunday Times that showed an increase in allied bombing in southern Iraq was described in leaked minutes of a meeting of the war cabinet as “spikes of activity to put pressure on the regime”.

Moseley told the briefing at Nellis airbase in Nevada on July 17, 2003, that the raids took place under cover of patrols of the southern no-fly zone; their purpose was ostensibly to protect the ethnic minorities.

A leaked memo previously disclosed by The Sunday Times, detailing a meeting chaired by the prime minister and attended by Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, Geoff Hoon, the then defence secretary, and Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of defence staff, indicated that the US was carrying out the bombing.

But Moseley’s remarks, and figures for the amount of bombs dropped in southern Iraq during 2002, indicate that the RAF was taking as large a part in the bombing as American aircraft.

Details of the Moseley briefing come amid rising concern in the US at the war. A new poll shows 60% of Americans now believe it was a mistake.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1669640,00.html

This is not "no-fly" zone enforcement. This is an act of war! An act nine months before receiving permission from Congress. Which makes this act an impeachable offense.

So, the only thing that was bullshit, was your comments.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Your scenario doesn't wash. These were "Pre-selected Targets!" Your scenario requires our pilots to be flying through doing routine reconnaissance. That couldn't of possibly been the case if you already have a target in mind and you are flying over there to specifically drop a bomb.

nonsense.

A pilot can have ground ordanance on board his aircraft in case targets present themselves (IE he is fired on)

we will just agree to disagree here.

you take the side of the Iraqis, and I will take the side of America.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Addressing a briefing on lessons learnt from the Iraq war Lieutenant-General Michael Moseley said that in 2002 and early 2003 allied aircraft flew 21,736 sorties, dropping more than 600 bombs on 391 “carefully selected targets” before the war officially started.

this proves NOTHING.

this was a campaign to soften the enemy before the oficial start of the war. it was a GOOD THING.

you contention that after the gulf war we were attacking them is what I wanted to discuss.

if you are talking about 2002 and 2003, hell, no problem, I will concede that. it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO to protect our guys during the upcomming war.

and all this time I thought you were talking about our enforcement of the no fly zone after the first gulf war.

either you have a hard time staying on topic, or you intentionall try to change the subject.

not sure which.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
if you are talking about 2002 and 2003, hell, no problem, I will concede that. it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO to protect our guys during the upcomming war.

These people disagree with you!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
and all this time I thought you were talking about our enforcement of the no fly zone after the first gulf war.

either you have a hard time staying on topic, or you intentionall try to change the subject.

not sure which.

I guess you chose not to read this part...

that the raids took place under cover of patrols of the southern no-fly zone;

...I even had it highlighted in bold, and yet you still chose not to read it!

Some people are blind at birth. Others are blind by accident. You are blind by choice!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
this was a campaign to soften the enemy before the oficial start of the war. it was a GOOD THING.

But they were not our enemy! Attacking another sovereign nation militarily (without being attacked first) within that nations borders is an act of war, not "...soften[ing] the enemy..."!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
this proves NOTHING.

Not true. It proves your inhumanity to man.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
nonsense.

A pilot can have ground ordanance on board his aircraft in case targets present themselves (IE he is fired on)

Not when you pre-select the targets.

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
we will just agree to disagree here.

This goes way beyond disagreement. For me to comment further, would be against the law!

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
you take the side of the Iraqis, and I will take the side of America.

You have nothing to do with America. You don't live as an American. You don't talk like an American. You don't show American values. You have no clue as to what the Constitution is all about. And you have nothing to be proud of!

I take that last one back. There is one thing you can be proud of. It is the opportunity you have to change.