|
By:
|
|
By:
BJT Does that help?
With what?? ...accepting your statement : BJT Joined: 30 Oct 04 | Topic/replies: 20,258 | Blogger: BJT's blog Well, John Howard's mark should see him get a life sentence multiplied by about 10,000 for the atrocities he committed. Wouldn't be forgotten for a long time..... I would be worried about myself if I thought like that...I dont think in that way.. But all wars are horrible horrible events. No doubt many opinions will vary on --pain v gain. Your comment "John Howard's mark should see him get a life sentence multiplied by about 10,000 for the atrocities he committed" is a statement of passion and your passion is respected. |
|
By:
Pauline a sneaky chance of winning
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Wiki:
The rationale for the Iraq War (i.e. the 2003 invasion of Iraq and subsequent hostilities) has been a contentious issue since the Bush administration began actively pressing for military intervention in Iraq in late 2001. The primary rationalization for the Iraq War was articulated by a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress known as the Iraq Resolution. The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world".[1] Additional reasons have been suggested: "to change the Middle East so as to deny support for militant Islam by pressuring or transforming the nations and transnational systems that support it."[2] For the invasion of Iraq the rationale was "the United States relied on the authority of UN Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 to use all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with its international obligations".[3] In the lead-up to the invasion, the U.S. and UK emphasized the argument that Saddam Hussein was developing "weapons of mass destruction" and that he thus presented a threat to his neighbors, to the U.S., and to the world community. The U.S. stated "on November 8, 2002, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1441. All fifteen members of the Security Council agreed to give Iraq a final opportunity to comply with its obligations and disarm or face the serious consequences of failing to disarm. The resolution strengthened the mandate of the UN Monitoring and Verification Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), giving them authority to go anywhere, at any time and talk to anyone in order to verify Iraq’s disarmament."[4] Throughout late 2001, 2002, and early 2003, the Bush Administration worked to build a case for invading Iraq, culminating in then Secretary of State Colin Powell's February 2003 address to the Security Council.[5] Shortly after the invasion, the Central Intelligence Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies largely discredited evidence related to Iraqi weapons as well as links to Al-Qaeda, and at this point the Bush and Blair Administrations began to shift to secondary rationales for the war, such as the Hussein government's human rights record and promoting democracy in Iraq.[6][7] Opinion polls showed that people of nearly all countries opposed a war without UN mandate and that the view of the United States as a danger to world peace had significantly increased.[8][9][10] UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described the war as illegal, saying in a September 2004 interview that it was "not in conformity with the Security Council."[11] Critics Accusations of faulty evidence and alleged shifting rationales became the focal point for critics of the war, who charge that the Bush Administration purposely fabricated evidence to justify an invasion that it had long planned to launch. [12] Supporters Supporters of the war claim that the threat from Iraq and Saddam Hussein was real and that it had later been established. The U.S. led the effort for "the redirection of former Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) scientists, technicians and engineers to civilian employment and discourage emigration of this community from Iraq."[13] As I reiterate to my daughters often....2 people can walk into the very same room and see different things Good discussion and we both good I hope!! |
|
By:
That is only relevant, if you use that example as say, the first daughter walked in with a balloon shoved in her face , and saw a balloon. The other daughter chose to shift the balloon out of her face and saw the whole room.
You are trying to show a different side to the argument, yet you have the UN secretary-general in your post as saying the invasion was illegal. You have shown that the agencies the president used to come up with his "facts" didn't agree with him, the UN didn't support him. And please don't suggest human rights *cough Rwanda cough Saudi Arabia cough cough* Against the advice of everybody, they invaded Iraq and slaughtered ridiculous amounts of people. Is that accurate, or not? |
|
By:
You are trying to show a different side to the argument, yet you have the UN secretary-general in your post as saying the invasion was illegal.
You have shown that the agencies the president used to come up with his "facts" didn't agree with him, the UN didn't support him. Yes ...that was the article....it in part supported your passionate view... |
|
By:
You are trying to show a different side to the argument, yet you have the UN secretary-general in your post as saying the invasion was illegal.
You have shown that the agencies the president used to come up with his "facts" didn't agree with him, the UN didn't support him. Yes ...that was the article....it in part supported your passionate view... |
|
By:
Well, John Howard's mark should see him get a life sentence multiplied by about 10,000 for the atrocities he committed. Wouldn't be forgotten for a long time....
This is the viewpoint I dont agree with .....fundamentally flawed given the words used in it ...which I put down to your passion. The pain v gain discussion is a different discussion and given the variance in opinion of those closer to the issue... it is one that you are passionate about and well I have given little if any thought to and even forgotten about. (quite frankly and perhaps heartlessly...) Being passionate about it is a good thing....I am just not...but respect you for it... |
|
By:
BJT
Excuse my ignorance, since I don't believe in voting, but in the box that needed to be ticked, was there a name next to it? Was the name Campbell Newman on the ballot? Of the independants voted for, does that mean we get to pick now whichever independent we like and can change them whenever we choose? How do we go about this? From what I understand, you vote for the person, and the party they represent is below them. If people were voting Anastasia because they were voting against Campbell, then why didn't they just vote for his party without him as leader? Or couldn't they? You have never voted? number boxes next to candidate name, different candidates in different seats from different parties with scatterings of independents I wish they would hurry up with the counting, I want my winnings ![]() |
|
By:
Only selling yourself short not voting BJ. The sausage sizzles are excellent. Generally get a nice char on the onions at the polling booth, far better than what Bunnings offer on a weekend.
|
|
By:
Just another way for them to track where everybody is IMO....
![]() ![]() |
|
By:
Looks like we're getting closer to a result - Pauline probably just misses. Key seats now are Ferny Grove where Labor should just fall over the line but the PUP candidate was an undischarged bankrupt and ineligible to run - by-election? Wait and see I guess. The other thriller is Whitsunday which closed to 88 votes yesterday - Labor behind
If Labor get both they get to 45 and a majority. If they get one of the two, shocked if they don't, they need one extra vote and I think Peter Wellington will announce that he is that vote today at 10.30 in his press conference If they lose both they'll need the Katter Party as well - see what happens there Should know soon |
|
By:
Would you get sausages at a by-election?
|
|
By:
you would hope so Rhino
|
|
By:
Indeed womble. For making me go twice I would want a steak sandwich option as well.
|
|
By:
![]() |
|
By:
very upmarket Rhino
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
By:
Deposed Queensland premier Campbell Newman has been sounded out as a long-shot contender for Liberal Party pre-selection in a federal seat in Victoria.
Former secretary of the Wodonga Liberal Party branch Lloyd Deane has written to Mr Newman after raising the matter at a branch meeting this week. Mr Newman was the major casualty in last weekend's Queensland election when he lost his seat of Ashgrove and the LNP is facing defeat. The letter's existence was a hot topic at the Nationals' gathering in Wodonga this week where its leader Warren Truss confirmed his party would be targeting the seat of Indi at the next federal election. ![]() |
|
By:
Madness
![]() ![]() ![]() Wish they would hurry up already |
|
By:
This has just reminded me of something - I have to sort out my postal vote business asap. My polling booth is directly opposite my house. It's ludicrous. I can't stand having to drag myself away from punting or playing with cars or watching rugby or walking up to the bottle shop just to cast a vote in this boring safe seat. I've got better things to do.**
Also,and this is the worst bit,whenever I vote I always run into some dreary neighbour who wants to have a little chit chat. I can't stand it. Twenty questions with some CNTT that I LOATHE!! I feel like saying 'why don't we take this chat across the street and we can pound some beers and look at the Jag and maybe you might get your t1ts out or maybe not I'm not bothered either way.' Postal votes are the go. ** DRINKING |
|
By:
the massive pre-poll vote in Victoria is being taken to court by PUP - i hope they put an end to it
Save the sausage sizzle |
|
By:
can't believe The Borg is trying to stay in power
![]() ![]() ![]() sums what's wrong with the LNP though, born to rule mentality at it's worst ![]() ![]() ![]() Premier Palaszczuk by the end of the week and a boost to Betfair balance ![]() |