The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/ iraq/story/0,12956,1063130,00.html
So now there are ever more prominent lawyers picking up on the dodgy grounds provided for war. This means one of two things:
1. That the legal grounds are shaky and these challenges to the justifications need to be met by the government
2. There are a lot more EVIL GODLESS COMMUNIST SMOKERS in this country than one may have thought.
So now there are ever more prominent lawyers picking up on the dodgy grounds provided for war. This means one of two things:
1. That the legal grounds are shaky and these challenges to the justifications need to be met by the government
2. There are a lot more EVIL GODLESS COMMUNIST SMOKERS in this country than one may have thought.
Page:
IB i s Guilty
Okaaaaay.
Not quite grasped this "humour" yet, but at least you're trying.
Not quite grasped this "humour" yet, but at least you're trying.
Bellghost wrote:
> Sense of humour failed you again eh ?
---
Au contraire, Little Miss Stampy-Foot, my sense of humour is in sparkling form.
Which is why I continue to pull your strings.
> Sense of humour failed you again eh ?
---
Au contraire, Little Miss Stampy-Foot, my sense of humour is in sparkling form.
Which is why I continue to pull your strings.
No, it brought tears.
As in rhymes with "Spears", not "Stairs"
As in rhymes with "Spears", not "Stairs"
Bellghost wrote:
>
> Oh dear, looks like I'm not banned either, all that button pressing
> wasted, eh Light ?
Wow...you're here after 9! Brave of you...care to answer the points, or are you happy to avoid 'em as usual?
>
> Oh dear, looks like I'm not banned either, all that button pressing
> wasted, eh Light ?
Wow...you're here after 9! Brave of you...care to answer the points, or are you happy to avoid 'em as usual?
That brought a smile.
Goatboy wrote:
> I've met Light.
> He tried to touch my bathing suit area.
'tried'?
> I've met Light.
> He tried to touch my bathing suit area.
'tried'?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> You guys need to meet up and settle your differences in person.
> Otherwise this idiotic and pointless hatred of eachother will just
> roll on until the end of time.
Heh. Well, that would be nice but frankly even if Bell lay brutalised on the ground, he'd still be whining about how his severe beating "proves that he can win a fight"...
> You guys need to meet up and settle your differences in person.
> Otherwise this idiotic and pointless hatred of eachother will just
> roll on until the end of time.
Heh. Well, that would be nice but frankly even if Bell lay brutalised on the ground, he'd still be whining about how his severe beating "proves that he can win a fight"...
Goatboy wrote:
> I've met Light.
> He tried to touch my bathing suit area.
Nice.
> I've met Light.
> He tried to touch my bathing suit area.
Nice.
Skarra wrote:
> unknown kernel wrote:
>
> Can you tell me what countries America has seen, said 'that looks
> nice', and invaded for no good reason? I can't think of any of the
> top of my head.
Uhh...apart from Iraq? Well, they've attempted to destabalise Venezuala, have supported the dictatorship in Uzbekistan...that's off the top of my head. The US have done good stuff too of course, but lets not be blind to the bad.
>
> Did previous UN Resolutions not allow for such action anyway ? Yes.
>
> No. Just as previous resolutions (vetoed by the US) don't approve
> the acquisition of chemical and biological weapons.
>
> As i posted, resolution 1441 finds Iraq in breach of resolutions.
> That is all the US and UK needs to invade. If the UN can't enforce
> its own resolutions, the US and UK will do it for them.
Cool. So that means Arab nations can now invade Israel using that logic, yeah?
>
> Actually, right up until the war, they were saying Iraq was still
> building dual purpose buildings. That means one day it could be
> making shoes, the next day, VX poison gas.
They were SAYING it. Seems that we're now finding that they were...well, lying.
>
> Perhaps he wasn't a huge threat to the west, but i'll bet the folks
> in Israels city's are grateful they don't have to be afraid of Al
> Samund, or Scud missiles anymore. Of which, several were still
> unaccounted for by UN weapons inspectors before the war, and now,
> thanks to the invasion, have very few places they can launch safely
> from.
Back to Israel...shouldn't they now be afraid cos according to your logic they can be attacked by surrounding states? Incidentally, those Scud missiles are still unaccounted for. Funny that...almost as if they're not in Iraq at all.
> unknown kernel wrote:
>
> Can you tell me what countries America has seen, said 'that looks
> nice', and invaded for no good reason? I can't think of any of the
> top of my head.
Uhh...apart from Iraq? Well, they've attempted to destabalise Venezuala, have supported the dictatorship in Uzbekistan...that's off the top of my head. The US have done good stuff too of course, but lets not be blind to the bad.
>
> Did previous UN Resolutions not allow for such action anyway ? Yes.
>
> No. Just as previous resolutions (vetoed by the US) don't approve
> the acquisition of chemical and biological weapons.
>
> As i posted, resolution 1441 finds Iraq in breach of resolutions.
> That is all the US and UK needs to invade. If the UN can't enforce
> its own resolutions, the US and UK will do it for them.
Cool. So that means Arab nations can now invade Israel using that logic, yeah?
>
> Actually, right up until the war, they were saying Iraq was still
> building dual purpose buildings. That means one day it could be
> making shoes, the next day, VX poison gas.
They were SAYING it. Seems that we're now finding that they were...well, lying.
>
> Perhaps he wasn't a huge threat to the west, but i'll bet the folks
> in Israels city's are grateful they don't have to be afraid of Al
> Samund, or Scud missiles anymore. Of which, several were still
> unaccounted for by UN weapons inspectors before the war, and now,
> thanks to the invasion, have very few places they can launch safely
> from.
Back to Israel...shouldn't they now be afraid cos according to your logic they can be attacked by surrounding states? Incidentally, those Scud missiles are still unaccounted for. Funny that...almost as if they're not in Iraq at all.
Page: