Usa....usa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m2c1Iw

I apologise if I appear to be laboring the point however I interpret the term vigilante as being one who acts independently when taking the law into their own hand. This term originanted according to some references during the era of the wild west of the USA when law and order were absent.
Taking the Iraq War as an example to determine how the term may apply to recent US action I submit that the President and others in the US administration spent considerable time persuading, argueing, cajolling or perhaps pressuring other countries to support the proposed action. Thereby forming the Coalition of the Willing.
While I don't know whether this coalition satisfied International Laws it does appears to me the US collected an acceptable level of support to avoid being accused of acting independently which by the way militarily they could have.

Anyway to the point of positive change that those outside the US are looking forward to one high on my priority list is foreign policy and a moderate and inclusive position with the Muslim world.


Mike:2tsup:

---

Mike,

I stand by my "vigilante" statement. You cite Iraq. Here was a case of rounding up support by lying to the people as well. When the Iraq war started it was reported that 80% of Americans supported the action. As the truth was revealed and the body bags started to come home the percentage changed. (Now they are ringing the bells. Soon they'll be wringing their hands--Sir Robt Walpole.) I have had close contact with war and that quotation was one I used the first day of conflict. The British people were so opposed to the Iraq War that the Prime Minister was ousted. Here in Oz the people opposing the war were in the majority. The "Coalition of the Willing " was not as willing as you imply..
However I also included in my examples of lawless action, Chile, Argentina and Cuba. Have you an argument in support of your viewpoint here?
In the Vietnam conflict the US dropped thousands of bombs on Laos and Cambodia who were not in the war and the terrible legacy of cluster bombs remains. The indiscriminate use of "agent orange" also still leaves a ghastly stain. American veterans receive compensation for being subjected to chemical warfare but the US denies agent orange had adverse effects on Vietnamese people. Was bombing neutral countries and in no way helping to clean up the mess justified? I have seen footage of Loatians trying to dispose of these terror weapons with the most primitive "equipment". Wouldn't the US gain more world respect if at the very least it gave these heroes some decent means of disposing of this lurking death? There are two ex Viet War Aussie soldiers who work alongside the Laotians. Think how it would be received if the US sent in something similar.

I totally agree with you that Obama has indicated a willingness to negotiate with the Muslim world. In that there is hope.

Jerry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerryc

However I also included in my examples of lawless action, Chile, Argentina and Cuba. Have you an argument in support of your viewpoint here?

---

Can't argue with you on these still havn't studied up on the circumstances, I'm only a young wipper snapper:U

Quote:

---

Wouldn't the US gain more world respect if at the very least it gave these heroes some decent means of disposing of this lurking death? There are two ex Viet War Aussie soldiers who work alongside the Laotians. Think how it would be received if the US sent in something similar.

---

Absolutely what a platform to have. Rebuilding and securing, should keep the military busy for years might even assist as part of solution to the financial crisis.

Mike

Jock,

You may have viewpoints to express that you consider pertinant to the discussion, but taking undigested slabs of "information" and presenting it agressively means such points as you wish to make are not going to be treated seriously by most people on this thread. Hope you take this as advice and not condescension.. Everyone has a right to be heard but equally everyone has a right to respect even if you strongly oppose their views.

Jerry

The axe swingeth. The next swipe may be someones head.:((

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerryc

Jock,

You may have viewpoints to express that you consider pertinant to the discussion, but taking undigested slabs of "information" and presenting it agressively means such points as you wish to make are not going to be treated seriously by most people on this thread. Hope you take this as advice and not condescension.. Everyone has a right to be heard but equally everyone has a right to respect even if you strongly oppose their views.

Jerry

---

What undigested slabs of information ?
Do the research . Digest it yourself .

As to aggression , that would be the attack on me by some posters on this thread .
Aside from that mentioned on the posted website that is .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by

The axe swingeth. The next swipe may be someones head.:((

---

Oh good , so you are going to do something about the attacks on me , for posting valid information pertaining to a point raised on this thread

Then , you can reinstall my posts eh Administrator .
thanks ,
Jock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manuka Jock

What undigested slabs of information ?
Do the research . Digest it yourself ..

---

How can I answer such considered logic? :respect:

Jerry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerryc

How can I answer such considered logic? :respect:

Jerry

---

Seeing as the administrator , in following his own personal agenda , as he has admitted to me in a Personal Message ,
has deleted the Posts ,
I give the link , for the main page .
http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm
The other pages that I posted , the Preface , and the 19 point indictment , follow from there .

As to the credence of the tribunal ,
the first page has this to say .

"Ramsey Clark served as U.S. Attorney General in the administration of Lyndon Johnson. He is the convener of the Commission of Inquiry and a human rights lawyer of world-wide respect. This report was given in New York, May 11, "

Manuka Jock
1. It is NOT administrator but Administrators. Plural.
2. It is Not personal Agenda but Forum rules.

Some people never learn. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidG

Manuka Jock
1. It is NOT administrator but Administrators. Plural.
2. It is Not personal Agenda but Forum rules.

Some people never learn. :no:

---

Oh , did the Administrator send you the same personal message ?

Point out to me , where in the Forum rules , this rule is ;
" Because I have had a gutful of truth by radicals "

Rather an odd rule eh , or rather it would be , if it did exist .
It doesn't , the Administrator is following a personal agenda ,

and is way out of order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manuka Jock

Oh , did the Administrator send you the same personal message ?

Point out to me , where in the Forum rules , this rule is ;
" Because I have had a gutful of truth by radicals "

Rather an odd rule eh , or rather it would be , if it did exist .
It doesn't , the Administrator is following a personal agenda ,

and is way out of order.

---

Manuka Jock, in response to your question regarding the Personal Message, when an Infraction is handed out, then yes, all Administrators get the same message as you got and you are very close to being sent to the naughty room if you do not desist with this behaviour.

Consider this your last warning :((

DJ
Administrator
Woodworking Australia's
WOODWORK FORUMS

For anyone interested in some background on Mr. Clark and the International War Tribunal here are the Wikipedia pages.
Hope this helps the discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsey_Clark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...rimes_Tribunal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manuka Jock

Point out to me , where in the Forum rules , this rule is ;
" Because I have had a gutful of truth by radicals "

---

The following seems to cover just about all possibilities really, link is here.

"The owner, administrators and moderators of this Forums reserve the right to delete any message or members for any or no reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold blameless these Forums, U-Beaut Enterprises the administrators, moderators, and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s)."

MJ, perhaps if we change the subject to merits and pitfalls of DIY electrical work in the US compared to Oz we may avoid disputation.:;


Mike

Thread re opened. Keep it nice and it can continue.

If it goes off the rails again the thread will be closed for good, the offending posts will be deleted, offenders may receive infractions and run the risk of losing some forum privileges and possible short term ban.

Neil