Hearing on MSNBC that shrub is selling that we had to create a

[HysteryDiagnosis]

battlefield on which to fight the terrorists... we are drawing them to Iraq, fighting them there, ya know... all the Iraqis who NEVER RAISED A F**CKING hand to U.S. interests. NEVER. NEVER. Fighting the terrorists... twisting, lying, spinning, spineless, sh*theads.

ON EDIT: Dan Patrick, another MORON.

[HereSince1628]

1. At this point what is another stupid lying justifications?

Just another in an endless stream of Bushit.

[Loonman]

2. Kinda like what Hitler said about Polish "terrorists"

Interesting.

[Crankie Avalon]

3. Recycling the ole "fly paper theory"...nothing new, including that it's...

...actually our troops who have become the trapped flies.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Is this justification/reason number 28 or 29? I lost track about 2

years ago.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

5. We didn't attract them to Iraq so much

as CREATE them in Iraq. imho

[HysteryDiagnosis]

7. No more than the British created "terrorists" in the 13 colonies

when they brought in mercs and hapless troops.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0187393/


Tagline: Before they were soldiers, they were family. Before they were legends, they were heros. Before there was a nation, there was a fight for freedom. (more)

Plot Outline: Peaceful farmer Benjamin Martin is driven to lead the Colonial Militia during the American Revolution when a sadistic British officer murders his son. (more) (view trailer)

User Comments: It makes you proud to be English (more)

[npincus]

6. The IDIOT is admitting that he CREATED a terrorist mecca, on purpose?

Hello, dopey MSM... didja HEAR THAT????

RESPOND! RESPOND!

[Norquist Nemesis]

9. Yep! "Created" kind of knocks down that "Liberated" argument. n/t

[Clark2008]

8. What did Dan Patrick do?

He's friends with Keith Olbermann - surely the Kahuna would set him straight. :)

[HysteryDiagnosis]

10. Maybe I got the wrong name off the screen.... lemme see..... you

mean "this" Dan Patrick???

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3392428.html
Oct. 12, 2005, 8:43AM
Dan Patrick kicks off campaign
Host announces on his radio show he's entering GOP Senate primary


By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Radio personality Dan Patrick on Tuesday joined the 2006 GOP primary field to succeed retiring Republican state Sen. Jon Lindsay in District 7.

[peekaloo]

16. Ugh!

I used to live in Houston and grew to despise this arsewipe. He should stick to pimping chicken wings and hate radio.

[intheozone]

11. And what exactly was wrong with the battlefield in Afghanistan??? nt

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. I can tell you exactly what was wrong with it.... right here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml


"Rumsfeld was saying that we needed to bomb Iraq," Clarke said to Stahl. "And we all said ... no, no. Al-Qaeda is in Afghanistan. We need to bomb Afghanistan. And Rumsfeld said there aren't any good targets in Afghanistan. And there are lots of good targets in Iraq. I said, 'Well, there are lots of good targets in lots of places, but Iraq had nothing to do with it.

"Initially, I thought when he said, 'There aren't enough targets in-- in Afghanistan,' I thought he was joking.

[Toots]

12. I guess the terrorists could not be lured to Afghanistan, maybe to cold

We looked in Afghanistan and found no terrorists so we had to find another palce to set up a battleground and lure them in. Now that is a real plan for victory if I ever heard one.

[JDPriestly]

14. That tactic should be against international law if it isn't already.

This attests to the inhumanity of the Bush administration. Are they suggesting that they are using the Iraqi people to catch bullets meant for us or bullets that would have been aimed at us had the Bush administration not lured the shooters to Iraq?

OK, so Bush doesn't understand morality or moral values or arguments based on morality or moral values. Isn't it stupid in any event to purposely attract terrorists to a country that possesses so much of that precious commodity, oil? What if the terrorists win and grab the oil? Bush's tactic is unbelievably stupid. If he wanted to attract the terrorists somewhere where we would have every tactical advantage and the stakes were low enough that losing would not cause us irreparable harm, why didn't he just fight the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan where they always were and had chosen to be and leave Iraq alone? Afghanistan and Pakistan actually have a lot of the extremists that support and are the terrorists and they don't have oil. How stupid. I hope the MSM is not falling for this idiotic argument.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. They haven't lured any shooters, they have outraged Muslims

and Arabs... they have released the hounds in Iraq, launched a civil war in the Iraqis honor, poisoned their soil, imprisoned their civilians, tortured them, blown up their cities, etc. I seriously doubt that we have made an intelligent move with this little foray into the unknown.

[G_j]

17. Aggressive War: Supreme International Crime

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110904A.shtml

Aggressive War: Supreme International Crime

By Marjorie Cohn
Tuesday 09 November 2004

Associate United States Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal. In his report to the State Department, Justice Jackson wrote: "No political or economic situation can justify" the crime of aggression. He also said: "If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us."

<snip>
Bush's war on Iraq is a war of aggression. "Aggression is the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this definition," according to General Assembly Resolution 3314, passed in the wake of Vietnam.


..more..
--------------------

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041116/ts_nm/iraq_falluja_un_dc&cid=564&ncid=1480

Statement by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson
Chief U.S. Prosecutor
at the Nuremberg Tribunals

August 12, 1945
on War Trials Agreement; August 12, 1945

There are some things I would like to say, particularly to the American people, about the agreement we have just signed.
For the first time, four of the most powerful nations have agreed not only upon the principles of liability for war crimes of persecution, but also upon the principle of individual responsibility for the crime of attacking the international peace.

Repeatedly, nations have united in abstract declarations that the launching of aggressive war is illegal. They have condemned it by treaty. But now we have the concrete application of these abstractions in a way which ought to make clear to the world that those who lead their nations into aggressive war face individual accountability for such acts.
<snip>

"We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which
their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the
war, but that they started it. And we must not allow
ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war,
for our position is that no grievances or policies will
justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced
and condemned as an instrument of policy."
<snip>

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson
Chief U.S. Prosecutor
at the Nuremberg Tribunals
August 12, 1945

READ THE ENTIRE STATEMENT HERE:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/jack02.htm

[HysteryDiagnosis]

18. So this is why we need to spend 400+ billion/yr on "defense". Don't

want any international courts taking us down for "legal" issues.