The US government did attack the twin towers - Page 2 - Political Forum

AzTeK · 05-07-2008, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colourislast

A few facts:

2) Israel has just as much right to exist on the land it sits upon as any other nation that exists today from conquest in the past. In fact, it has given back more of it conquered land than just about any nation.

You got most of the other stuff nailed, but that statement there is false. UN Resolution 242 and with it the international community unanimously agreed on "Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war", which means that all land that is occupied by Israel that goes beyond what the UN gave israel in the partition plan is in fact illegally occupied land and Israel has no right to be on it.

colourislast · 05-07-2008, 01:16 PM

Well, if the UN passed a resolution on the matter.... Where was the UN when Egypt attacked? Backing Egypt and putting sanctions on Israel for defending herself.

AzTeK · 05-07-2008, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colourislast

Well, if the UN passed a resolution on the matter.... Where was the UN when Egypt attacked? Backing Egypt and putting sanctions on Israel for defending herself.

Would not know about that, but your statement was false nonetheless. The UN unanimously agreed that Israel's occupation of palestinian territory beyond what was given to it in the partition plan is illegal.

colourislast · 05-07-2008, 01:45 PM

It was also illegal for Saddam to not allow weapons inspectors to go anywhere they wanted unannounced. He was required to dismantle and destroy all WMD's he claimed to have had in front of inspectors. This was part of the cease-fire agreement from Gulf War I and if he failed to comply it would end the cease-fire agreement with the UN. So since there is great emphasis on the UN "law" for Israel’s existence and borders, is there the same for the original UN "law" for Iraq's noncompliance with inspectors to end the cease-fire?

AzTeK · 05-07-2008, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colourislast

It was also illegal for Saddam to not allow weapons inspectors to go anywhere they wanted unannounced. He was required to dismantle and destroy all WMD's he claimed to have had in front of inspectors. This was part of the cease-fire agreement from Gulf War I and if he failed to comply it would end the cease-fire agreement with the UN. So since there is great emphasis on the UN "law" for Israel’s existence and borders, is there the same for the original UN "law" for Iraq's noncompliance with inspectors to end the cease-fire?

You pointedly bring it to the core of the issue: the UN needs to sanction Israel just like they sanctioned Iraq for not complying with international law. But I guess that won't happen since the big brother of Israel, the USA, will simply veto any such bill. The selective treatment of different countries due to political agendas is disgusting.

colourislast · 05-07-2008, 02:21 PM

The UN is a spineless organization that supports dictatorships and corruption for food programs. It has grown into a useless body only benefiting those individuals in the UN, not the countries they represent.

Smith,Winston · 05-09-2008, 09:52 PM

"THE U.S. GOVERNMENT" is quite an unclear term -It suggests some degree of unity -There are so many separate groups and agendas within it that it would make your head spin... While it is almost certain that some who might be considered part of the US government -not to mention those outside the government employed in various positions -might have done -or been duped to do -things which enabled, facilitated or failed to hinder 9-11, we would do well to realize that there are some honorable people employed by and within the government. Are we subject to manipulation by foreign powers? Yes -in every part of our society... government, education, industry... Are there some who would perpetrate such against their own -knowingly? Probably -but, if any, few enough to require that any others employed to move the plan forward would have to see their part as accomplishing something else -or that they be otherwise coerced to do so. We should all be wary of ways in which we might be manipulated -no matter our position.

Ummwhat · 05-09-2008, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzTeK

Would not know about that, but your statement was false nonetheless. The UN unanimously agreed that Israel's occupation of palestinian territory beyond what was given to it in the partition plan is illegal.

The UN passed that after they had the land. Anyway. There is a lot of dispute there.

Fr33Ch3chnya · 06-27-2008, 12:19 PM

Just remember, the UN is nothing more than a relic, an antique, it has no use and isn't as effective, anyone here who is good with history here will probably remember that the League of Nation was ineffective when it comes to solving the world's many problems then don't depend on the UN, the UN couldn't stop the Rwandan genocide, neither the Kashmir disputes, neither the Middle Eastern conflicts, it doesn't put a heavy weight on China for being oppresive to Tibet, it didn't have a strong stance when USA and the coalition invaded Iraq before they can get into the diplomatic bussiness, so far the UN is practically useless.

AzTeK · 06-27-2008, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fr33Ch3chnya

Just remember, the UN is nothing more than a relic, an antique, it has no use and isn't as effective, anyone here who is good with history here will probably remember that the League of Nation was ineffective when it comes to solving the world's many problems then don't depend on the UN, the UN couldn't stop the Rwandan genocide, neither the Kashmir disputes, neither the Middle Eastern conflicts, it doesn't put a heavy weight on China for being oppresive to Tibet, it didn't have a strong stance when USA and the coalition invaded Iraq before they can get into the diplomatic bussiness, so far the UN is practically useless.

Let's hear your suggestions...trash talking alone is easy.