|
Best idea ever: Muslim gay bar possibly opening next to Ground Zero mosque (pg. 18)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Careful Nik I bet he is looking for an excuse to travel to Finland. Oh wait thats commie country with poor plumbing. |
You try installing plumbing to a ing igloo! |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
You try installing plumbing to a ing igloo! |
If it wasn't for your communist dictator stealing your heat you'd live in a tropical climate, right Kevin? :D |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
You try installing plumbing to a ing igloo! |
:stongue: |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
Grenada - Reagan (R)
Operation Desert Storm - George Bush (R)
Whateverthehellwe'redoing now - George W. Bush (R)
Swings both ways, governments just like to control :p |
That was exactly my point. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Key word was START.
1812 - Debatable, but the general idea was that the Brits started it.
WWI - Ongoing, we joined in to help allies.
WWII - Same thing, plus we were attacked.
Korea - Ongoing, UN police action
Bosnia - Ongoing, NATO peacekeeping action (which was still wrong, NATO is not a peacekeeping force, they are a force of aggression)
Afghanistan - We were attacked, but not by a nation state, but there is still justification for going in (staying as long as we have though..... sort of need to, but its just going to be an ongoing battle with no clear parameters for victory).
Iraq - YEE ING HAW. |
As stated earlier, just about any war can be justified because justification is subjective...
1812 - US declaired war, not Brits... by "Brits started it" I presume you mean prevoked, that is the debatable point
WWI - one could argue you joined because a few Americans were accidently killed by a German U-boat... Justified?
WWII - don't disagree; however, Afghanistan you were attacked too (and I don't buy your later distinction as being material)
Korea - war was obstensively started by the partician of Korea @ Potsdem... who was there... two lefties and a righty, I guess it was all Churchill's fault though. Also, US entry was by US initiative (as was the UN "police action")
FYI, NATO is a defense organization, not aggressive force.
My Point, Nou, is that people of all political ideologies start wars/police actions/military interventions, not just persons on the right of the present day US political spectrum... any attempt to argue otherwise is total dishonesty. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| i'd still like to see kev start a war on nou's face. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i'd still like to see kev start a war on nou's face. |
Using Nou's reasoning re: 1812 it would actually be he who started it because he prevoked Kev.... I say it would say Kev has jus ad bellum. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Using Nou's reasoning re: 1812 it would actually be he who started it because he prevoked Kev.... I say it would say Kev has jus ad bellum. |
don't you use your fancy latin on me! i thought it was cassus belli (sp?)? what the do i know. never took latin. but i do know that jehovah begins with an I! :stongue: |
|
|
| ziptnf |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
You're cool and all, but I'm not going to take the bait. So kindly off and take your trolling elsewhere. |
 |
|
|
| DJ Mikey Mike |
<- This has been my face since post number one.
What a massive ing weapon The17sss is.
Internet. Serious business. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
don't you use your fancy latin on me! i thought it was cassus belli (sp?)? what the do i know. never took latin. but i do know that jehovah begins with an I! :stongue: |
Cassus belli is a cause/reason for war (essentially); whereas, jus ad bellum is the right to wage war (hostilities are considered justified). Looking at WWII the caussus belli for the Soviets were many (wanting to expand territory and influence, desire to eliminate the fascist regimes, need to defend themselves, etc.); however, due to the Hitler-Stalin Pact they did not have jus ad bellum until the Germans launched Operation Barbarosa. Simillarly, the Brits had many reasons to go to war with Germany (none of them actually having to do with Poland); however, they did not have jus ad bellum until Poland was attacked thereby allowing them to initiate hostilities in fulfillment of their mutual defence treaty with Poland.
In this case; Kev wants to punch Nou out because he's a self-righteous, annoying, pinko, twat (not saying whether or not I agree with him); however, until Nou attacked him personally Kev lacked jus ad bellum. |
|
|
|
|
