Ahhh..now we're getting to the root of the matter. The root of the matter is that you don't care either way, whether the war was over Terrorism or not, or whether it was justified or not. Well all you had to do was say so.
Afghanistan was widely accepted as being the base of operations for Al Qaida. The ruling regime in Afghanistan expressed open support for the perpetrators of September 11th and stated quite bluntly that they would not turn Bin Laden over...if you were really interested in knowing the difference. >And how come the US and UK against one country now constitutes a World War? Uhh..the US and the UK attacking a country in defiance of the UN security council and even NATO could perhaps be the reason why. I made mention of if Russia and China had done it, what you thought the consequences would be. You didn't answer. If China and Russia had taken it upon themselves to Invade Iraq would you be so quick and ready to let this pass? You have not answered. >Now, let's look at when Russia first invaded Afghanistan many, many years ago... Was there any world response? If you wish to compare the UK to a communist country then be my guest. But if you do that, don't pretend to be a Democratic,'Good' society working toward world peace, who hold themselves to the ideals of the United Nations etc. Say instead that you are a Communist Dictatorship. Then we can all understand the UKs actions, since they would concur with the expected actions of such a society. One should not say one is 'concerned' about the Iraqi people. Since if you were 'concerned' about the Iraqi people's plight now, you would be concerned about whether attacking Iraq was justified in the first place. I.e. if Iraq were never attacked, the Iraqi people would not now be in the position they are because of the attacks. One logically follows the other. There would not be the second, without the first. Therefore our concern about the reason for the first is duly justified, and independent of action to address the second. The guilty party is always quick to say one should ignore the crime. And indeed if evidence was falsified then according to law a crime has been committed. A crime of the highest order. -Gel -----Original Message----- From: Philip Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] So, how about the "evidence" that Bin Laden was in Afghanistan during the attack? Seems as though that was brushed under the carpet... And wasn't that an assault where one country attacked a WHOLE COUNTRY first when it was only a few individuals who attacked them? What's the difference now? Ooooh, because the US and UK are involved, it's got to be explained BULLSHIT! So, how many times have you seen a politican NOT lie to you? I believe the phrase "How do you know when a politician is lieing? Their lips are moving!" covers it pretty well... So, why didn't the world demand answers after the Afghan war? Was it because it was "a war against terrorism"? Hmmmmm? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
