Really? You're gonna use that movie to prop up your argument? (I hate to tell you, but, Santa isn't real, either) You need to look up the word FICTION...
That's a nice unbiased source there... http://www.cursor.org/toc.htm
Again, you are confusing fiction with fact, that doesn't make you look very smart...
Would you rather we treated them as un-uniformed combatants under the Geneva Conventions? Because combatants not in uniform are, under the Geneva Conventions, considered spies or saboteurs and may be LEGALLY summarily executed. Which would save us a lot of money and free up troops for other duties.
To remove a brutal tyrant from power. Saddam's regime not only used Weapons of Mass Destruction against Iraqis (Kurds are still Iraqis...) but, also waged a campaign of terror including rape rooms. He [Hussein] you might also remember, defied 17 separate UN resolutions demanding he A} Disband his WMD programs B} Allow UN inspectors free access to see that the WMD's were in fact gone, or rendered harmless. We KNOW he had had weapons of mass destruction, because he used them, during the Iran/Iraq war and also on his own Kurdish population. Whether he still had them or not, his responsibility to the Cease Fire Agreement that ended the 91 Gulf War (That Hussein started by invading Kuwait...) and to the UN was to PROVE the weapons no longer existed and were disposed of properly (Not hidden in the desserts or shipped to foreign lands or sold or given to terrorist groups he was a vocal proponent of. He did not.
Because when people want to, and have shown an ability to kill you, you try to kill them first, or render them unable to harm you, this is called self-defense, you may have heard of it.
Terrorists. Because if they are busy actively fighting THERE they aren't blowing up HERE.
A threat to our allies is also a threat we must face, that is known as friendship. If your friend was constantly threatened by a bully with a history of mass murder, wouldn't you do something to help him? You may have heard the quote:"All that is needed for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing." Well, thanks to President Bush, and our military and allies, Saddam Hussein is no longer prosperous. You may have also heard the quote: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." The injustices of Hussein's regime are also ended, aren't they?
I never said he was, nor, did anyone in the Bush administration.The bad thing about the widespread use of technology is the bad guys can use it too...
Yes, the UK and Spain have their own problems with Muslim Terrorism, in both countries, the Muslims who have immigrated to them are by and large, unabashedly radical and opposed to assimilating into the culture of the nations they live in. Spain's decision to appease the terrorists by giving in to their demands that Spain pull it's troops from Iraq and Afghanistan is a lot like Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler.
1 No, he does not take orders from a crazy person. He responds to the very real threat posed by those who follow the crazy person's denouncements and pronouncements.
The Tamil Tigers movement is a political one, they do not claim to be a religious group. Neither Christianity nor Judaism requires non-believers to be second class citizens nor do either advocate (Aside from the Crusades, which were nearly 1000 years ago) conversion by the sword. Yes, Christians believe that if you aren't a Christian you will go to hell, but, Christians are not in such a hurry to speed the process that they will explode themselves to ensure your death.
I believe that either sharia or the Koran institutes the jizya. I further believe that non-Muslims in an area using sharia law cannot build new churches or synagoges. I am under the impression that non-Muslim religions cannot proselytize where sharia is in force. There are several other things that come to mind but these will suffice to show that probably non-Muslims do become 2nd class citizens under Sharia.[/quote]
[/quote]
