Or not really illegal and they now it?
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:29 AM
  To: CF-Community
  Subject: Re: Bush gives the finger to the world again

  Because Bush has a tendency to unilaterally declare war on people he doesn't
  like?

  -Kevin

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Andy Ousterhout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:13 AM
  Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again

  > Kevin,
  >
  > If what we did was illegal, why didn't France/Germany take us to court?
  >
  > Andy
  >   -----Original Message-----
  >   From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  >   Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:35 AM
  >   To: CF-Community
  >   Subject: Re: Bush gives the finger to the world again
  >
  >
  >   Semantics. International law vs. domestic law. Illegal in one, possibly
  not
  >   in the other. We are signatories on the United Nations Charter which is
  a
  >   constitution of international law. It is a treaty to which all
  signatories
  >   are legally bound.
  >
  >   I know we like to say that the U.N. has no control over the U.S., but
  when
  >   the US signed that treaty we agreed to be held to that body's laws.
  >
  >   -Kevin
  >
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: "Heald, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  >   To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  >   Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:16 AM
  >   Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again
  >
  >   > The U.N. has no regulatory control over the United States.
  >   >
  >   > We are a sovereign nation.
  >   >
  >   > Hence not illegal.
  >   >
  >   > --
  >   > Timothy Heald
  >   > Web Portfolio Manager
  >   > Overseas Security Advisory Council
  >   > U.S. Department of State
  >   > 571.345.2319
  >   >
  >   > The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the
  U.S.
  >   > Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  Nor have these
  >   > opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This
  e-mail
  >   is
  >   > unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
  >   >
  >   > -----Original Message-----
  >   > From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  >   > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:56 AM
  >   > To: CF-Community
  >   > Subject: Re: Bush gives the finger to the world again
  >   >
  >   >
  >   > The UN resolution basically said that if Iraq didn't cooperate with
  >   > dismantelling their WMD that we could attack. However, Iraq couldn't
  >   > dismantel what they didn't have. So we trumped up evidence to show
  that
  >   they
  >   > did. Hence the illegal.
  >   >
  >   > -Kevin
  >   >
  >   > ----- Original Message -----
  >   > From: "Heald, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  >   > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  >   > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 9:42 AM
  >   > Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again
  >   >
  >   > > Tell me again how the war was illegal?
  >   > >
  >   > > The United Nations holds no mandate over our actions.  We are still
  a
  >   > > sovereign nation capable of acting unilaterally.
  >   > >
  >   > > You might not have thought it was a good idea, but that doesn't make
  it
  >   > > illegal.  Now I would be forced to agree that it was
  unconstitutional
  >   > (read
  >   > > illegal) as war was never formally declared, but for some reason we
  no
  >   > > longer feel bound by the constitution in this country.  As most
  >   mainstream
  >   > > people, both left and right, believe that the constitution is a
  living,
  >   > > interpreted document, you shouldn't complain about that too loudly.
  If
  >   we
  >   > > want to strictly follow one section of the constitution, than all
  need
  >   be
  >   > > applied equally (Firearms laws, private property, gov't only getting
  >   > > involved in those things that are specifically mentioned in the
  >   > > constitution).
  >   > >
  >   > > Additionally why should we support the economies of nations that in
  >   effect
  >   > > cost lives of American soldiers?  These supposed allies (whose
  defense
  >   we
  >   > > have bled for time and again) refused to take part in the fighting,
  and
  >   > have
  >   > > continued to take part in the reconstruction unless we met their
  >   demands.
  >   > > They don't deserve our money, and make no mistake, this is our
  money.
  >   > >
  >   > > I can't agree Kevin.  We are doing nothing wrong here.  We may have
  >   erred
  >   > in
  >   > > invading.  I am sure we have made many mistakes during the
  occupation.
  >   > Yet
  >   > > we're still trying to do the right thing there, and the people that
  >   > wouldn't
  >   > > stand with us during the tough part shouldn't profit now that there
  is
  >   > money
  >   > > to be made.
  >   > >
  >   > > --
  >   > > Timothy Heald
  >   > > Web Portfolio Manager
  >   > > Overseas Security Advisory Council
  >   > > U.S. Department of State
  >   > > 571.345.2319
  >   > >
  >   > > The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the
  U.S.
  >   > > Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  Nor have
  these
  >   > > opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This
  e-mail
  >   > is
  >   > > unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
  >   > >
  >   > > -----Original Message-----
  >   > > From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  >   > > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:29 AM
  >   > > To: CF-Community
  >   > > Subject: Bush gives the finger to the world again
  >   > >
  >   > >
  >   > > Former top U.S. officials are blasting the Bush administration for
  >   > reopening
  >   > > a rift with Europe by excluding critics of the war from prime
  contracts
  >   > for
  >   > > Iraq's reconstruction.
  >   > >
  >   > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html
  >   > <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
  >   > > <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
  >   > >
  >   > > "I thought we were in the process of acquiring support rather than
  >   > > alienating it," former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
  (search)
  >   > said.
  >   > >
  >   > > So let me get this straight.
  >   > >
  >   > > 1. Economy is bad.
  >   > > 2. Find a patsy country and accuse them of something unfounded.
  >   > > 3. Get called on it by other countries.
  >   > > 4. Attack anyway
  >   > > 5. Deny reconstruction contracts to countries that wouldn't help in
  an
  >   > > illegal war.
  >   > >
  >   > > And people are complaining? I don't get it. It looks like a perfect
  plan
  >   > to
  >   > > boost the economy by giving local companies big contracts.
  >   > >
  >   > > -Kevin
  >   > >   _____
  >   > >
  >   > >
  >   > >
  >   >   _____
  >   >
  >   >
  >   >
  >
  >
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to