'I Didn't Join to Be Sacrificed': U.S. Troops Fed Up with Risky Afghanistan Strategy

[carpro]

This war was a mistake from the time that GW Bush started it.

LOL :laugh:

You're even out of step with your own kind.

Even the most liberal of Bush haters were not in favor of letting Al qaeda continue to use Afghanistan to continue to train their terrorists and plan their acts of terrorism.

 

[OldRegular]

The law of nations defines a "sovereign state" as

§ 4. What are sovereign states.

Every nation that governs itself, under what form soever, without dependence on any foreign power, is a Sovereign State, Its rights are naturally the same as those of any other state. Such are the moral persons who live together in a natural society, subject to the law of nations. To give a nation a right to make an immediate figure in this grand society, it is sufficient that it be really sovereign and independent, that is, that it govern itself by its own authority and laws.

http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm

The United States government depends on a foreign power (private central bank) to sustain it. Therefore it is not a sovereign state.

My question then is does the Law Of Nations even apply?

Poncho, Sometimes you get so involved in spinning your wheels you can't see the truth!

 

[poncho]

Poncho, Sometimes you get so involved in spinning your wheels you can't see the truth!

This doesn't answer my question.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The United States government depends on a foreign power (private central bank) to sustain it. Therefore it is not a sovereign state.

With reasoning like this, you ought to be a CNN commentator.

 

[poncho]

With reasoning like this, youy ought to be a CNN commentator.

I'd prefer that to being a fascist at Saudi Faux Snews any day.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I'd prefer that to being a fascist at Saudi Faux Snews any day.

Just as I suspected ... a closet Marxist shill.

You might want to check out the true ownership behind all those "real news" sites you're constantly cut-and-pasting from.

 

[poncho]

Just as I suspected ... a closet Marxist shill.



You might want to check out the true ownership behind all those "real news" sites you're constantly cut-and-pasting from.

I'm beginning to think you have no idea what it means to be a marxist as you exhibit more of the traits of being a marxist than I.

You might want to write an email to Saudi Faux Snews and give them the same advice about checking out who they are actually sourcing before they fill 8 or 9 pages of their archives with stories from a Sunni Muslim anti Assad activist paid by the EU and "another nation" (he lives in England) pretending to be "The Syrian Observatory For Human Rights". I doubt it would make much difference though as he seems to fit perfectly into Fox News and Saudi Arabia's agenda to get the United States involved militarily in Syrian regime change.

 

[FollowTheWay]

LOL :laugh:

You're even out of step with your own kind.

Even the most liberal of Bush haters were not in favor of letting Al qaeda continue to use Afghanistan to continue to train their terrorists and plan their acts of terrorism.

Bush didn't invade Afghanistan to go after bin Laden. How naive can you be? He invaded Afghanistan to transition to an invasion of Iraq. That was always his real objective. It had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact bush at one point said he was no longer interested in capturing bin Laden. He was simply a pawn in the Neo-Con pursuit of world domination. Try to understand reality.

 

[carpro]

Bush didn't invade Afghanistan to go after bin Laden. How naive can you be? He invaded Afghanistan to transition to an invasion of Iraq. That was always his real objective. It had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact bush at one point said he was no longer interested in capturing bin Laden. He was simply a pawn in the Neo-Con pursuit of world domination. Try to understand reality.

:laugh:LOL

And the Bush haters say...