Fan lined up?check.Excrement ready to hit? check

[samclem]

Geneva Convention: We are in compliance. There's a meaningful distinction between a lawful combatant and an unlawful combatant--it's not just a semantic nicety. Where US personnel have been guilty of abuses (against US policy) I'm fairly sure they've been punished.

I think the last president who lied about starting a war was Johnson.

 

[Zipper]

If a nuclear bomb goes off anywhere in the world all bets are off.

We can kiss our ER's goodbye.

 

[Cool Dood]

Crap, I just hope we get to the '06 elections and get a democratic house before the monkeys in charge start a war with Iran.

I was hoping for at least an end to the regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia before Bush leaves office, with any of Egypt, Syria, France, etc. as a bonus, but hey -- to each his own

 

[SC]

Crap, I just hope we get to the '06 elections and get a democratic house before the monkeys in charge start a war with Iran.

That's why we're likely to see it before the election... bombing makes for good TV, gets people all riled up to support their leader.

I was hoping for at least an end to the regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia before Bush leaves office, with any of Egypt, Syria, France, etc. as a bonus, but hey -- to each his own

As far as I know, you don't have to be a US citizen to join the military, and they could use the help...

SC

 

[eridanus]

Geneva Convention: We are in compliance. There's a meaningful distinction between a lawful combatant and an unlawful combatant--it's not just a semantic nicety.

Is that you, John Yoo?

 

[Cool Dood]

As far as I know, you don't have to be a US citizen to join the military, and they could use the help...

Hey, I am a US citizen! I also pay some US taxes, but if anyone has an address where I can make a direct donation to the US military... (which I think would be a more useful contribution than anything I could do in a uniform, anyway, but i am signed up for the pre-draft thingy, that applies no matter where you are.)

 

[REWahoo]

I think the last president who lied about starting a war was Johnson.

The majority of those on the board are too young to remember that particular event, but I'll bet they remember the last president who lied about not using his Johnson.

 

[2B]

I think theres an aspect of the policy that involves keeping the nukes away from people who have previously taken our citizens hostage and scream "death to america" and "death to israel" a lot.

There you go CFB, trying to be rational.

Iran signed the nonproliferation treaty. They willingly gave up their right to develop nuclear technology for their benefits in that treaty.

What this will show is whether the UN has become so worthless that they can't/won't do something meaningful. If nothing gets done after Iran's announcements, the UN needs to go away.

 

[SC]

Hey, I am a US citizen!

Sorry - thought you were Canadian for some reason...

 

[Cool Dood]

Hm, not sure what gave you that impression.

Actually I'm both, FWIW. But one's better than the other.

 

[bpp]

Texas Proud:

But, to your answer... most countries have signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty (looks spelled wrong...)... this treaty is the basis for not having nuclear power distributed to countries that do not have it already...

2B:

Iran signed the nonproliferation treaty. They willingly gave up their right to develop nuclear technology for their benefits in that treaty.

I found the text of the treaty. It is pretty short.

http://disarmament2.un.org/wmd/npt/npttext.html

Regarding nuclear power:

Article IV

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

Iran seems to be well within its treaty rights so far.

And if one wants to develop nuclear weapons:

Article X

1. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.

So it's pretty much a voluntary thing. A country can bail at any time by giving notice and some kind of justification (most any country can cite some kind of reason, I imagine.) For that matter, there don't seem to be any provisions for any kind of sanctions if a country decides to go ahead and develop nuclear weapons even without going through the formalities above.

All in all, I don't see how the treaty provides a justification for other countries to be able to a dang thing about it if Iran or any other signatory decides to develop nuclear weapons.

So if this treaty gets used as an excuse for another war, I am going to be mighty pissed off. (Which on top of being stupid, might make me a real danger to myself.)

Bpp

 

[samclem]

- Iran admitted to having a nuclear weapons program even though it was proscribed by the NPT. They admitted it after it was discovered and publicized. Then they said they needed a nuclear power program.

- I think the NPT is largely irrelevant in this case: it is meant to help slow the spread of nukes by providing a regime for monitoring nuclear technologies (including enrichment) and to provide a mechanism for identifying those who are cheating. Enforcement is left up to the international community. The IAEA is no longer monitoring the Iranian enrichment program, so the main benefit of the treaty is gone.

- If it comes down to "pressuring" Iran, we may have to decide whether sanctions , with their record of poor results and misery for the affected nation, are really more humane than other tools.

 

[youbet]

The majority of those on the board are too young to remember that particular event

Hey, my lottery number was "25" 
Class of "69"
2S deferment expired spring, '69.  Draft notice arrived summer '69

but I'll bet they remember the last president who lied about not using his Johnson.

Damn....that's a good one!  This thread was getting depressing until I came across this......  Thanks.

 

[samclem]

The majority of those on the board are too young to remember that particular event, but I'll bet they remember the last president who lied about not using his Johnson.

Hey, that was good! I'm so glad I didn't say "LBJ"

 

[bpp]

The majority of those on the board are too young to remember that particular event,

It was already in high school history textbooks by the 70's, so no problem.

Lyndon BJ (you're welcome) wasn't the first to lie about reasons to go to war, either. Besides Tonkin Gulf, Remember the Maine. The Lusitania. Even the Boston Massacre was blown out of proportion. And then there are those dark rumors about Pearl Harbor... and the suggestions that have been made that the US secretly encouraged Hussein to invade Kuwait in order to provide an excuse to go to war against him.

I guess expecting anything better is just naive (or stupid), but jeeze it gets tiresome being hit with the same stupid-stick over and over again.

Bpp

 

[Cool Dood]

This is too funny:

 

[2B]

Cool Dood,

Keep making posts like this and you may lose your Canadian citizenship.

 

[lets-retire]

SC-- just wondering what violation of the 4th Admendment your talking about that was not challegned and is no longer in effect?

 

[SC]

SC-- just wondering what violation of the 4th Admendment your talking about that was not challegned and is no longer in effect?

Hi - I really didn't intend to start or get into a point-by-point political debate; it's great that this board has people of all stripes and everyone can state their opinions (some like GWB, some can't stand him, and that's all fine).

But since you asked directly, there were two things in my mind when I mentioned the fourth amendment. The first was the warrantless domestic spying on American citizens. The second was the provision in the first "Patriot Act" that allowed gov't agents to break into your home and conduct secret searches without telling you. The fourth amendment is pretty clear about these things:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The point I was trying to make is that when GWB took office, I expected to disagree strongly with many of his policies, but I did not expect that he and others in his administration would be arguing that they have the power to spy on American citizens, to declare them enemy combatants and hold them indefinitely in secret, etc. So my surprise at the reports that pre-emptive nuclear war is being discussed seriously in the White House, well, that's just something else I didn't expect to hear.

I mean, I disagreed strongly with a lot of Bush Sr.'s policies, but at least then I felt like we had grown-ups in charge. (Likewise with Bill Clinton's administration.) The current bunch just scares the bejeezus out of me.

Anyhow, I'm sure this isn't what y'all came here for. How 'bout them REITs? And look, boobies!

SC

 

[Cool Dood]

They seem so smug... like they know that they're called "boobies"

 

[lets-retire]

SC--Ok as long as your not going to bring up the wire taps.

 

[gtmeouttahere]

I'm just fine with them developing nukes.  We should just limit the range of those nukes to reach only the surrounding countries.

These islamofacists want to KILL us and every other person or country who does not share their belief system.  Why doesn't anyone understand that?  We absolutely cannot allow or condone anyone or any leader who outright claims to destroy Isreal or any other country for that matter, to develop a nuclear program. 

These are third world countries, they do not think like us.  They will use this technology for mass destruction, not as a peace tool.  They have already admitted to that.  They do not care if they die as long as they take us with them.  That is a FACT people.  They believe Allah will have a special place in heaven for them if they kill infidels.  They will become "hero's".  This is why people like them blew up the Trade Center, hijack planes, take hostages, behead hostages, blow up subways, etc...  their idea of a perfect world is extermination or enslavement of all non-believers of Islam. 

This is no laughing matter.  The only reason the US and Russia did not use them against each other is because they wanted their people to live and would lose everything if they used them.  These people do not care.

Thats why we need to stop them.  It is our duty and obligation to protect our country and our allies from attack from a foreign entity.

How soon we all forget past events and take for granted the freedom that we have.

 

[73ss454]

It's tough to win a fight against someone who would rather be dead.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

No its quite easy.

Give them their wish.

 

[gtmeouttahere]

No its quite easy.

Give them their wish.

Bingo!!!  Ding Ding Ding Ding, we got a winner!!!!