O
OCC
Guest
[Really, was that remark necessary? Removed!] </font>[/QUOTE]jwp...don't know what you said but I'm willing to bet it ain't "God bless you brother".
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
O
OCC
Guest
"Regulations would imply the UN actually had their own enforcement and well they dont."
Yet.
"The United States of America has it's own constitution and will follow what is best for the American people."
True. Just don't say it's about liberating the Iraqi's then.
"Whatever the reason used for going to war, it matters none now."
Agreed. So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about.
Yet.
"The United States of America has it's own constitution and will follow what is best for the American people."
True. Just don't say it's about liberating the Iraqi's then.
"Whatever the reason used for going to war, it matters none now."
Agreed. So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about.
O
OCC
Guest
"If you don't enforce your rules, they aren't rules, they are a joke. MAKE the man comply."
So which are they? Rules to be enforced or resolutions that really can't be enforced as the poster above said? I'm confused.
No I wouldn't let him get away with breaking the rules a 13th time. I wouldn't even let him get away with it a 2nd time. But a poster earlier said they weren't even rules. They were resolutions.
Also I'd make my motives clear. I wouldn't say it's a war on terrorism when terrorism is happening all over the world. I wouldn't say it's about liberating the Iraq people when someone just said above that America will do what it has to in its' best interests. All I want is honesty. I can disagree, but I respect honesty. If Bush would be straightforward instead of "flip flopping" I would have respect for him even if I disagree with him.
Just to clue everyone in though...I don't tend to care which party is in power. I support the opposition because I never trust the politicians in power. I was fairly young when I learned that and the philosophy has served me well.
I think Saddam was on the level of Hitler and both are a "test model" of the antichrist. I was not alive to pray for Hitler but I have prayed for Bush and I have prayed for Saddam? Have you guys?
So which are they? Rules to be enforced or resolutions that really can't be enforced as the poster above said? I'm confused.
No I wouldn't let him get away with breaking the rules a 13th time. I wouldn't even let him get away with it a 2nd time. But a poster earlier said they weren't even rules. They were resolutions.
Also I'd make my motives clear. I wouldn't say it's a war on terrorism when terrorism is happening all over the world. I wouldn't say it's about liberating the Iraq people when someone just said above that America will do what it has to in its' best interests. All I want is honesty. I can disagree, but I respect honesty. If Bush would be straightforward instead of "flip flopping" I would have respect for him even if I disagree with him.
Just to clue everyone in though...I don't tend to care which party is in power. I support the opposition because I never trust the politicians in power. I was fairly young when I learned that and the philosophy has served me well.
I think Saddam was on the level of Hitler and both are a "test model" of the antichrist. I was not alive to pray for Hitler but I have prayed for Bush and I have prayed for Saddam? Have you guys?
O
OCC
Guest
Ok Ken, fair enough. Now...why don't people say that then? I hear many people say it's a war on terrorism (implying in general).
I'd appreciate it if you would not call me BILLY, I am not Billy. I am BillyMac thank you very much.
Secondly this subject gets me hot under the collar quicker than many other subjects, mainly because of all those hostile feelings I had decades ago over VN.
Therefore, I am withdrawing from the active participation of this thread. I will continue to read here, but I will no longer respond.
And for the record, my pants have never been down but I have learned that you are no angel, emerald city or otherwise. EmeraldCtyHawk might be more appropriate.
And I do not hate the president...... I hate his policies.
emeraldctyangel
New Member
"Regulations would imply the UN actually had their own enforcement and well they dont."
Yet.
Cute. I bet that we will both be worm food before anyone on the planet ever sees that happen.
"The United States of America has it's own constitution and will follow what is best for the American people."
True. Just don't say it's about liberating the Iraqi's then.
I didnt say it was about liberating Iraqis. But now that you mention it, that was a nice bonus for them. I cant think of anything better than not having to live with the fear that they wont be dragged off into the night and shot in the back of the head by their own government.
The quote you took out of context was in response to your quip on what I thought you were referring to as 'international law'.
"Whatever the reason used for going to war, it matters none now."
Agreed. So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about.
OIL! Why I want my spoils of war then. What oil? Are you getting some for free somewhere?
Oh brother.
Yet.
Cute. I bet that we will both be worm food before anyone on the planet ever sees that happen.
"The United States of America has it's own constitution and will follow what is best for the American people."
True. Just don't say it's about liberating the Iraqi's then.
I didnt say it was about liberating Iraqis. But now that you mention it, that was a nice bonus for them. I cant think of anything better than not having to live with the fear that they wont be dragged off into the night and shot in the back of the head by their own government.
The quote you took out of context was in response to your quip on what I thought you were referring to as 'international law'.
"Whatever the reason used for going to war, it matters none now."
Agreed. So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about.
OIL! Why I want my spoils of war then. What oil? Are you getting some for free somewhere?
Oh brother.
T
TexasSky
Guest
Canada was in the news today - apparently they are the third country in the world to make homosexual marriages legal. It was on the radio this morning.
O
OCC
Guest
emeraldcity...I took no quotes out of context. One person specifically said there were no "rules" and one says "there are". Not my fault I caught an inconsistency now is it? As for oil...well we don't have to attack a sovereign nation for it...we have our own.
Somehow you missed my statement here. Read it over again VERY carefully.
"So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about."
"Canada has politics?"
Superdave has a sense of humour?
"Canada was in the news today - apparently they are the third country in the world to make homosexual marriages legal. It was on the radio this morning."
You mean to tell me you have the audacity to comment on something that happens in Canada because you heard it on the news? Does that then give me the right to comment on something in your country because I heard it on the news? I thought so.
By the way...I don't see your point TS. You have some states that support gay marriage do you not? I wonder what sorts of things your country is leading the world in...
Somehow you missed my statement here. Read it over again VERY carefully.
"So if I say it was done over oil it does not matter and there is nothing to argue about."
"Canada has politics?"
Superdave has a sense of humour?
"Canada was in the news today - apparently they are the third country in the world to make homosexual marriages legal. It was on the radio this morning."
You mean to tell me you have the audacity to comment on something that happens in Canada because you heard it on the news? Does that then give me the right to comment on something in your country because I heard it on the news? I thought so.
By the way...I don't see your point TS. You have some states that support gay marriage do you not? I wonder what sorts of things your country is leading the world in...
T
TexasSky
Guest
King James,
I never told you not to comment on anything that you heard in the news. I told you not to call President Bush - Hitler.
Regarding gay marrige - The Federal courts here ruled that gay marriages performed in those states were invalid.
I never told you not to comment on anything that you heard in the news. I told you not to call President Bush - Hitler.
Regarding gay marrige - The Federal courts here ruled that gay marriages performed in those states were invalid.
T
TexasSky
Guest
UN resolutions can be enforced.
They just aren't usually.
The long and short of it, King James, is that when Iraq lost the war they started, the terms of the treaty they made required they comply with certain things. They did not comply. Failure to comply with the treaty would invalidate it.
They just aren't usually.
The long and short of it, King James, is that when Iraq lost the war they started, the terms of the treaty they made required they comply with certain things. They did not comply. Failure to comply with the treaty would invalidate it.
emeraldctyangel
New Member
Texas you are right. They could be. And the world would be much better for it. But the UN is not filled with statesmen that have diplomacy and fortitude to preservere in their stances.
King James, I dont think you caught an inconsistency - I think you are confused.
If I may address what you said to TS...that reminds me of Janene Garafalo the actress, when she became some sort of self appointed spokesperson (who knows what for)...someone asked her "How did you become qualified to comment on these matters?" Her reply was "I got sober and watched a lot of news." Oh brother.
I dont think that I shall live to see the day where gay marriage makes sense, no matter what news outlet is reporting it.
King James, I dont think you caught an inconsistency - I think you are confused.
If I may address what you said to TS...that reminds me of Janene Garafalo the actress, when she became some sort of self appointed spokesperson (who knows what for)...someone asked her "How did you become qualified to comment on these matters?" Her reply was "I got sober and watched a lot of news." Oh brother.
I dont think that I shall live to see the day where gay marriage makes sense, no matter what news outlet is reporting it.
O
OCC
Guest
And once again, I never did that.
O
OCC
Guest
emeraldcity, you are right. I am confused. Seems to me someone said there were no regulations (little things called rules) in place by the UN and someone else mentioned "UN rules". Yep...I'm confused. And yep...that was an inconsistency. Don't worry...I don't think you're a hell bound heretic because we disagree. What dost THOU think?
emeraldctyangel
New Member
lol James...Im pretty sure it matters none what we think of each other, just that we accomodate the other in love and mercy. God Bless.
O
OCC
Guest
God bless you too.
