- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
No. Seriously, some questioned the legality of those planes, but with no possibility of hititng those planes, it can't be used as a rationale for war.
No. Seriously, some questioned the legality of those planes, but with no possibility of hititng those planes, it can't be used as a rationale for war.
Please link to evidence of "no possibility of hitting those planes".
Then sir, you clearly do not understand Casus belli. Firing on another countries planes is an act of war, and under self defense rules we had every justification to put an end to it. Now, although that is not the only thing that violated the UN mandates for Iraq, and they were numerous. It is a justification. If you are trying to sit here and say that a plane has to be hit, or American's or their allies have to die in order for it to be an act of war, then you are woefully misinformed.
j-mac
Do you think none ever got hit because they didn't want to hit them?
But despite some 250,000 sorties and a bounty on the pilots' heads — Saddam has offered $14,000 to anyone who bags an American plane — not a single one has been shot down.
What explains this remarkable record? Part of the answer is that U.S. aircraft generally fly above 20,000 ft., beyond the reach of Iraqi guns. At the same time, electronic-warfare planes jam the guidance systems of any Iraqi missiles threatening U.S. planes. The pilots believe that only a "golden BB"--a lucky shot — can force them down inside Iraq. They say the Iraqis are generally firing blindly, scared to turn on anything that emits radiation and might trigger a U.S. missile strike.
Read more: The Forgotten War - TIME
wait before you bloviated some rumor mongering about bush telling us to fly low? which is it boo?
What? I had fun with a rumor that I clearly made it as such. Humor. If it were an actual argument I wouldn't have pointed ut it was a rumor. I worry about you rev. I really, really do.
So wait now, you are claiming it's rumor? Please boo no one is buying it.
Boo said:Yeah, he couldn't hit any and that scared us to death. There was even rummor that Bush wanted us to fly low and get hit so he'd have a excuse (bay of Token anyone?). But that was just a rumor as far as I know.
Again J, anyone who wants to suspend disbleif and accept any reasonat all, no matter how weak. Saddam was contained and unable to hit us at all.
Oh, I do. And no, it doesn't. Only the UN can enforce a UN mandate. We can walk away if we don't like it, but the UN mandate belongs to the UN and not the US. And we were not remotely scared of the Iraqi firings, equal to pissing in the wind.
Like I keep saying, when someone wants an excuse, someone can find one.
What you keep saying is so totally wrong it is laughable. But let's suppose that you are correct that only the UN can enforce their mandates. Then:
1. Explain how they do that
2. Please show me where the United States, or any other sovereign country has foregone that sovereignty in order to allow their own planes, or any other interest to be in harms way.
We don't hand over our ability to defend, and protect our own interests when we join with the UN Joe. Even though that is what liberals would like to see happen.
j-mac
Absolutely!
The United States didn't give it's agreements, treaties, membership to various defense organization, its sovereignty, etc. when they joined the United Nations. To claim that the US cannot act in its own self interests, without prior approval from the UN, is ludicrous.
What you keep saying is so totally wrong it is laughable. But let's suppose that you are correct that only the UN can enforce their mandates. Then:
1. Explain how they do that
2. Please show me where the United States, or any other sovereign country has foregone that sovereignty in order to allow their own planes, or any other interest to be in harms way.
We don't hand over our ability to defend, and protect our own interests when we join with the UN Joe. Even though that is what liberals would like to see happen.
j-mac
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?