Breaking: U.S. forces launch largest air assault since invasion

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: dthmstsr US embassies don't do much for united statians who run afoul of the law, can't even refer an attorney, but if the law is notoriously unjust and there were a US embassy in Cuba and Helena Houdova were a US citizen, things like this (two or three months ago) wouldn't be stood for:

United Statians?? Haven't heard that one.

That's some pretty good chest thumping, but your claim that "things like this wouldn't be stood for" rings quite hollow. What, exactly, are you claiming we could do about it? Again, you may recall the case of Michael Fay, in Singapore. Americans felt that there punishment of caning was "notoriously unjust" and our embassy begged and pleaded for months, to no avail.

Quote by: dthmstr show me where I said that. it ain't no free ticket. it gives the citizen full constitutional rights to see justice done.

Read your own sentence above, 'lil Dude. You just contradicted yourself. You say "It ain't no free ticket" and then "it gives the citizen full constitutional rights". What constitutional rights are those? Ours? No, it doesn't. Once you cross a foreign border, our constitution means diddlysquat.

You also said...

--"did you miss the part where I said they were AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT WERE KILLED? kill or sanction the killing of an American citizen, and you declare war on the US. that is in our Constitution."--

It sure sounds to me like you're saying that simply being "AMERICAN CITIZENS" is supposed to be some sort of big deal. Again, show me in our Constitution where Americans being killed in a foreign country is a declaration of war.

--"also, there is NO law in Iraq against Christianity. it is found only in the Jihad."--

Jihadis in Iraq are killing people by the thousands, yet even though we currently own the country, we don't seem capable of stopping them from continuing to do so. You have any recommendations on what extra special things we can do to stop them if Christian missionaries are involved?

Those missionaries knew exactly what the consequences of getting caught by the wrong people were, and were either too arrogant to comprehend them, or were willing to join the ranks of history's Glorious Christian Martyrs for their efforts.

Well, they got their wish. You should be very proud.

--"murder is defined as the killing of one person by another person(s)."--

And if an American citizen is murdered on foreign soil, it is subject to the laws of that country, not ours. Period.


------------------------------------------------

Edit PS... sorry I got your name confused, rm. My bad.
.

[RickSp]

Just to recap, the US launched the "largest air assault since the invasion" (which may not have actually have been the largest) and turned out to be a joke as insurgents never bothered to show up, even as bloodshed continued all over the rest of country.

And our Bible-school boy has found a new unsubstantiated justification for invading other countries that even the Bush administration never dreamed up. Of course, it could be used to justify invading about half the word, but be that as it may.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: jose Death Sentence for Afghan Christian Shows Hollowness of Bush's Democracy Nothing gets Fox News' dander up like a persecuted Christian, but what happens when the persecuting is coming from a brand spanking new democracy that their pet president has enshrined? Fuzzy journalism, that's what happens. The "Dayside" couple Juliet Huddy and Mike Jerrick on Tuesday (March 21, 2006) tried to deal with the case of Abdul Rahman, a 41-year-old Afghani who faces death because he converted to Christianity. Jerrick correctly pointed out that capital punishment for rejecting Islam is permitted under the constitution of the "government we helped put in place" to replace the Taliban. http://www.newshounds.us/2006/03/22/death_sentence_for_afghan_christian_shows_hollowness_of_bushs_democracy.php

Well, democracy isn't necessarily accompanied by the freedoms, tolerance, and justice system that many americans have come to associate it with. The election of the Hamas party should be evidence enough of that. People, when given the choice, don't always choose what you want them to. That is the fickle nature of democracy.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Ricksp Just to recap, the US launched the "largest air assault since the invasion" (which may not have actually have been the largest) and turned out to be a joke as insurgents never bothered to show up, even as bloodshed continued all over the rest of country.

The way I heard it was it was an air assault because going overland was far too dangerous. :rolleyes: The results, however, were the same... the insurgents melted away before we got there.

.

[Osborn F Enready]

Phoenix Fire said: Well, democracy isn't necessarily accompanied by the freedoms, tolerance, and justice system that many americans have come to associate it with.

I say:
I agree. Our original system has very little to do with democracy, and most of the problems have come from an increase in it, as opposed to a limited government. (my opinion, of course.)

Phoenix Fire said: The election of the Hamas party should be evidence enough of that. People, when given the choice, don't always choose what you want them to. That is the fickle nature of democracy.

I say:
Hmmmm, I didn't know democracy existed to only please one persons desires? Democracy is mob rule, majority rule, nothing being safe from its reach or scope.

Gang-Rape is an adequate example of democracy.

[phoenix_fire]

Well, that's what I meant. People seem to think that just because a country is a democracy, they should all start behaving like americans. I was ridiculing this narrow view.

[Osborn F Enready]

Phoenix Fire said: Well, that's what I meant. People seem to think that just because a country is a democracy, they should all start behaving like americans. I was ridiculing this narrow view.

I say:
Well, I admit I have trouble spotting ridicule and sarcasm in typed media format unless it is highly exaggerated. Sorry I mistook your position.

As you have properly stated before, I am a little short wicked.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Sonart .The way I heard it was it was an air assault because going overland was far too dangerous. :rolleyes: The results, however, were the same... the insurgents melted away before we got there..

The way I heard it was that the 101 Airborne does this sort of thing, so it seemed like a good thing to do. It appears most of the Iraqi troops drove in. One might say that the use of helicopters was to maximize surprise but as the attack was in broad daylight and not the dead of night, that rationalle seems less likely.

Pretty telling, four years into the war that the US cannot locate the insurgency, even with the help of the newly trained Iraqi troops, while the insurgency has not trouble finding our troops.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: Sonart . United Statians?? Haven't heard that one. That's some pretty good chest thumping, but your claim that "things like this wouldn't be stood for" rings quite hollow. What, exactly, are you claiming we could do about it? Again, you may recall the case of Michael Fay, in Singapore. Americans felt that there punishment of caning was "notoriously unjust" and our embassy begged and pleaded for months, to no avail. Read your own sentence above, 'lil Dude. You just contradicted yourself. You say "It ain't no free ticket" and then "it gives the citizen full constitutional rights". What constitutional rights are those? Ours? No, it doesn't. Once you cross a foreign border, our constitution means diddlysquat. You also said... --"did you miss the part where I said they were AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT WERE KILLED? kill or sanction the killing of an American citizen, and you declare war on the US. that is in our Constitution."-- It sure sounds to me like you're saying that simply being "AMERICAN CITIZENS" is supposed to be some sort of big deal. Again, show me in our Constitution where Americans being killed in a foreign country is a declaration of war. --"also, there is NO law in Iraq against Christianity. it is found only in the Jihad."-- Jihadis in Iraq are killing people by the thousands, yet even though we currently own the country, we don't seem capable of stopping them from continuing to do so. You have any recommendations on what extra special things we can do to stop them if Christian missionaries are involved? Those missionaries knew exactly what the consequences of getting caught by the wrong people were, and were either too arrogant to comprehend them, or were willing to join the ranks of history's Glorious Christian Martyrs for their efforts. Well, they got their wish. You should be very proud. --"murder is defined as the killing of one person by another person(s)."-- And if an American citizen is murdered on foreign soil, it is subject to the laws of that country, not ours. Period. ------------------------------------------------ Edit PS... sorry I got your name confused, rm. My bad. .

and if that country is doing the killing, it is the country that needs judged. the country REFUSES to do a damn thing. in the presence of inaction, it is either our job or the UN's job to see that justice is seen through. well, here we are. and what the hell does this have to do with the topic.


PS: no problem, although I do like the United "statians thing." is that anything like the United Nations?