Bush,Blair, Aznar- "Monday is last day of diplomacy"

[Sloth]

[

Individually those two may not be enough to convince a person of a need for action. Combined they are compelling.

[/QUOTE]

Who says so?? I mean: should we agree that every dictator that violates UN resolution must be taken down?
If so: why a democracy should be able to violate them??
Or we just add more and more specifics till we agree only on: Saddam should be taken down??

[Dauphin]

I'm not saying you have to agree with the argument, I am not arguing whether or not we should take him out, I am discussing the debate technique.

You split the argument down, you can not do that and remain with a logical argument.

[catullus]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
Its not just that Saddam is a dictator, its not just that he has defied resolutions, its not just that he has WoMD, its not just that he has previously invaded another country and then defied the ceasefire terms etc... It is all these things combined.

You have got to argue the sum of the parts, not the individual parts.

But then we're back at Israel again. WoMD (real, not perceived), repeated invasions, annexations, disrespect for UN, all that.
(Technically not a dictatorship, but there's no doubt the
country houses hundreds of thousands of people born within its preceived borders, barred from civil rights).

What us eurolefties stubbornly, but pretty hopelessly are trying to make some rightwingers to understand is that you can't have double standards in ethics or foreign affairs.

But IF you are upholding double standards, make sure you set the highest standards for yourself, your friends and your allies. Clean out your own house first, before attacking others. (Splinter in the eye and all that)

I remember Halabja. I also remember what newspapers reported the story on main page, and what papers hid them on page 27. The right-wingers failure to to take an ethical stand, instead of an economic/political one, is not forgotten among my Kurdish friends.

Whatever. It's probably pointless to argue.

C.

[Sloth]

Originally posted by catullus
you can't have double standards in ethics or foreign affairs.
C.

Exactly. Don't split up if you don't want to, as long as you set a STANDARD.

You can't make the rule so specific ( by adding up) that is applicable only to a single case....

[faded glory]

quote:
Originally posted by catullus
you can't have double standards in ethics or foreign affairs.
C. "

Yes you can. Since when couldnt you? I can name a thousand examples in the 20th century where such was the case.




Oh yes. War is coming. I dont think the sky is going to fall like are saying. I think it will be quick, and 80% of the iraqi army will surrendur in the first 72 hours.


UN: UN fails to reach agreement. France threatens veto, Coalition of the willing enacts 1441 as justification.

Baghdad:Fortifications are dug and civilians are fleeing to the kurdish north.

Kuwait: Coalition forces are in there assembly points

[Ned]

Originally posted by OliverFA


I disagree. We watched the construction of the future of the British and the Spanish.

Very true.

The most interesting message from Aznar and two other EU prime ministers is their support for the Atlantic Charter - meaning a close relationship with the US.

Europe is clearly now divided into two camps, those pro- and those anti-US.

Thank you lefties. Thank you France. You did well.

[Sloth]

Originally posted by faded glory

Yes you can. Since when couldnt you?

No, you can't. If you want to go ahead with the pretense you are the "good guys" you can't.

[Ned]

Originally posted by catullus


But then we're back at Israel again. WoMD (real, not perceived), repeated invasions, annexations, disrespect for UN, all that.
(Technically not a dictatorship, but there's no doubt the
country houses hundreds of thousands of people born within its preceived borders, barred from civil rights).

What us eurolefties stubbornly, but pretty hopelessly are trying to make some rightwingers to understand is that you can't have double standards in ethics or foreign affairs.

But IF you are upholding double standards, make sure you set the highest standards for yourself, your friends and your allies. Clean out your own house first, before attacking others. (Splinter in the eye and all that)

I remember Halabja. I also remember what newspapers reported the story on main page, and what papers hid them on page 27. The right-wingers failure to to take an ethical stand, instead of an economic/political one, is not forgotten among my Kurdish friends.

Whatever. It's probably pointless to argue.

C.

Every time someone says Israel is violating UN resolutions, I simply ask the question: Name one.

Regardless, the US has been actively involved in settling the ME crisis since Kissinger.

[SlowwHand]

[Sloth]

the three stooges??

[SlowwHand]

No. 3 men that understand following through.

[TheStinger]

Following through can have an unfortuante meaning in the uK

[Bosh]

Every time someone says Israel is violating UN resolutions, I simply ask the question: Name one.

Well for starters there are resolutions; 106, 111, 127, 162, 171, 228, 237, 248, 250, 251, 252, 256, 259, 262, 265, 267, 270, 271, 279, 280, 285, 298, 313, 316, 317, 332, 337, 347, 425, 427, 444, 446, 450, 452, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 476, 478, 484, 487, 497, 498, 501, 509, 515, 517, 518, 520, 573, 587, 592, 605, 607, 608, 636, 641, 672, 673, 681, 694, 726 and 799.
Of course some of them are obsolete (esp. the Lebanon-related ones) but ones applying to settlements, Jerusalem, deportations, Geneva Convention violations and land grabs stand.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
UR, what does this have to do with anything. Why do all you extreme lefties always try to change the subject and attack the US?

So Ned, pointing out that the US has blocked UNSC resolutions in the past is an attack? You are a wee bit too paranoid.

Originally posted by Ned
Example: Saddam is a dictator that should be removed:
Lefties: The US has supported many a dictator in the past.

Example: Saddam has violated X UN resolutions.
Lefties: Israel has violated more.

Example: Saddam has WoMD and is a threat.
Lefties: Israel has nukes and is a threat.

Never address the issue. Simply attack the US and Israel.

How are these attacks? These are simply facts.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by TheStinger
Following through can have an unfortuante meaning in the uK

Since I respect Brits in general, and like you personally, I'm going to just let boundless opportunities pass.