wolfowitz a legitimate target?

[brad]

wolfowitz a legitimate target? US targeted saddam. or do u think now that US has won militarily that all resistance is 'terrorism'.

[Wake up CALL]

legitimate:

1 a : lawfully begotten; specifically : born in wedlock b : having full filial rights and obligations by birth <a legitimate child>

Using this definition I do believe he was a legitimate target so I voted yes.

Good poll Brad...........

[Cyrus]

The war in Iraq was far from being legitimate, as far as legitimate wars can exist. We have been through this before: As far as the U.S. was concerned, there was no direct mandate from Congress to the Prez to go to war. The most explicit and direct mandate is required in such a vital process, contrary to what bush supporters and the cowards opposing them have claimed. (Of course, the U.S. has undertaken beligerent action towards dozens of countries post-WWII without the express authority of Congress, but this does not legitimize any of those actions.)

As far as the int'l community is concernce, a nation (the U.S.) has taken it upon itself, unilaterally and outside explicit UN rules, to enforce United Nations' Resolutions, constructing, in the process, illegitimate (in the eyes of the int'l treaties that constitute the U.N.) "coalitions". That nation has gone to war against another nation outside the realm of int'l law -- the rest is simply hot air diversion.

When we understand that the war in Iraq was illegitimate, we could perhaps understand some implications, which we might do well to consider, even now, as theoretical exercises: A bomb planted by Iraqis detonates in Fort Bragg killing hundreds of American soldiers; a bomb planted by same detonates in the offices of a U.S. government agency killing dozens of gov't employees and civilians; an airplane carrying a U.S. officer and civilians is downed by Iraqi bombs/ground fire; etc.

It is interesting to note that, while the above would be ruled completely legitimate by a force superior to the U.S. that would enforce int'l law and treaties to which the US is a signatory (invading Martians perhaps...), now that the "coalition" military forces have been declared as legitimate occupying forces by the United Nations, acts of non-military resistance and of civilian unsubordination could well be completely illegitimate as far as the Geneva Protocols are concerned! In other words, the people who bombed Wolfowitz's hotel could be legitimately shot on sight by Americans.

But it's amusing, no, it's really tragic, to see the pro-war arrogant superpatriots turning desperately to issues of legitimacy, UN sponsorship and financial aid from the dethpicable frogs and krauts, when the body bags start piling up. Ah, the perils of bastard wars.

[brad]

well i just mean zionists say pal. 'should' target military not civilian.

but israelis blow up apt. building 2 kill hamas leader.

[Wake up CALL]

Cyrus do you read just enough of an article or a bill passed by Congress to pass judgement without bothering to understand it at all? Just wondering where you come up with these off the wall erroneous opinions.

[Gamblor]

Because the UN is an impartial governing body.

You can't compare anything Arab nations do to anything the US/Israel does.

Israel is a democratically elected government (even if you assume only Jews have the democratic rights, which again, is false).

Every single Arab state, including the PA, is a dictatorship/regime of some sort, to the highest levels of government, and thus does whatever pleases its leader , not its people.

Apples and Oranges.

[nicky g]

The fact that your own citizens have democratic rights is no excuse for treating other people badly.

[J.R.]

Are you Mike Haven, or are you using the Mason picture he displays as well?

[elwoodblues]

Are you claiming that you read the full text of public laws and bills before commenting on them? Give me a break, I would bet good money that there isn't a single individual in the country that has read all of some of the larger budget bills that pass (usually several thousand pages long) even the legislators that pass them. The PATRIOT Act alone is a couple hundred pages...again, I would bet that a relatively small number of people who comment on it have read it in its entirety.

Are you really complaining that he/she hasn't read the full text or are you complaining about the conclusions that they're making?

~elwood

[Gamblor]

But the fact that those people call for the destruction of the state is.