Re: ? the new ammendments to 2257



[ Hot Wet Photosets ] [ Return To Main Board ] [ WSP Home Page ]

Posted by somedaddy on July 03, 2005 at 02:12 [68.164.0.184]

In Reply to: Re: ? the new ammendments to 2257 posted by J on July 02, 2005 at 14:00

So Saddam is a bad guy. Does that give anyone the right to invade his country and kill thousands of innocent people? And don't give me that "we freed them" BS. We are no beyyer than the 9/11 terrorists in my opinion. They want us there so much that they are prepared to strap bombs to themselves in order to get us out.

The fact remains that no WMDs were found. Whether he had them is irrelevant. And why shouldn't he have had them? Because we say so? What gives us the right to deny him the right to defend himself? But then if he could have defended himself we would never have invaded. Imagine the US invading a country that could fight back. Look at the mess in Iraq and think what might happen when a situation arises and we HAVE to go to war. I wouldn't want to be on the same side as the US. I'm British and being on the same side as the US is dangerous, especially for soldiers on the ground. The US armed forces are so bad that every single UK casualty in the first Gulf war was killed by the US "friendly fire". I suppose their philosophy is shoot first aim later....



Email:


Replies :



[ Hot Wet Photosets ] [ Return To Main Board ] [ WSP Home Page ]