Another Iraq Discussion with Crack and BS

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Col. Crackpot wrote:oh please, that is awfully fucking thin,
Chapter 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter states that the only legal justification for engaging in military action without Security Council authorisation is self-defense.

Hmmm, I must have missed the part where Saddam attacked first. Moron. I won't even go into the violation of the Nürnberg Principal, since it has more words then your brain can hold.
and would depend of proff that Bush deliberated intended to hold Iraq as a conquered land.
Lie.
He did not and the US and UN are working to establish a sovereign, democratic Iraqi government. try again ya kook.
Drivel.
User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29312
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by Vympel »

Whatever the US and UKs supposed intentions in invading Iraq has dick to do with the legality of their actions, Col.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

Chapter 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter states that the only legal justification for engaging in military action without Security Council authorisation is self-defense.
hey assfucker, Do you have enough fingers to count all of the UN Security Council resolutions allowing the use of force?
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Chapter 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter states that the only legal justification for engaging in military action without Security Council authorisation is self-defense.
hey assfucker, Do you have enough fingers to count all of the UN Security Council resolutions allowing the use of force?
My fingers won't be needed because you don't have squat.
User avatar
Einhander Sn0m4n
Insane Railgunner
Posts: 18630
Joined: 2002-10-01 05:51am
Location: Louisiana... or Dagobah. You know, where Yoda lives.

Post by Einhander Sn0m4n »

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Chapter 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter states that the only legal justification for engaging in military action without Security Council authorisation is self-defense.
hey assfucker, Do you have enough fingers to count all of the UN Security Council resolutions allowing the use of force?
Hey, that's an insult to us real assfuckers! ;) :D

He's a HATfucker... :teeth:
Image Image
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote: He's a HATfucker... :teeth:
It'll be a cold day in hell before you write something worth reading.
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

BoredShirtless wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:
Chapter 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter states that the only legal justification for engaging in military action without Security Council authorisation is self-defense.
hey assfucker, Do you have enough fingers to count all of the UN Security Council resolutions allowing the use of force?
My fingers won't be needed because you don't have squat.
http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 wrote:[Adopted as Resolution 1441 at Security Council meeting 4644, 8 November 2002]

The Security Council,

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President,

Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

Recognizing the threat Iraq’s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,

Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

Deploring the absence, since December 1998, in Iraq of international monitoring, inspection, and verification, as required by relevant resolutions, of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, in spite of the Council’s repeated demands that Iraq provide immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), established in resolution 1284 (1999) as the successor organization to UNSCOM, and the IAEA, and regretting the consequent prolonging of the crisis in the region and the suffering of the Iraqi people,

Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,

Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein,

Determined to ensure full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions with its obligations under resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions and recalling that the resolutions of the Council constitute the governing standard of Iraqi compliance,

Recalling that the effective operation of UNMOVIC, as the successor organization to the Special Commission, and the IAEA is essential for the implementation of resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions,

Noting the letter dated 16 September 2002 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iraq addressed to the Secretary-General is a necessary first step toward rectifying Iraq’s continued failure to comply with relevant Council resolutions,

Noting further the letter dated 8 October 2002 from the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of the Government of Iraq laying out the practical arrangements, as a follow-up to their meeting in Vienna, that are prerequisites for the resumption of inspections in Iraq by UNMOVIC and the IAEA, and expressing the gravest concern at the continued failure by the Government of Iraq to provide confirmation of the arrangements as laid out in that letter,

Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq, Kuwait, and the neighbouring States,

Commending the Secretary-General and members of the League of Arab States and its Secretary-General for their efforts in this regard,

Determined to secure full compliance with its decisions,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq’s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual declarations, the Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the Council, not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other delivery systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on aircraft, including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological, and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to weapon production or material;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12 below;

5. Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, including underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted, and private access to all officials and other persons whom UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the mode or location of UNMOVIC’s or the IAEA’s choice pursuant to any aspect of their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the IAEA may at their discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, may facilitate the travel of those interviewed and family members outside of Iraq, and that, at the sole discretion of UNMOVIC and the IAEA, such interviews may occur without the presence of observers from the Iraqi Government; and instructs UNMOVIC and requests the IAEA to resume inspections no later than 45 days following adoption of this resolution and to update the Council 60 days thereafter;

6. Endorses the 8 October 2002 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of the Government of Iraq, which is annexed hereto, and decides that the contents of the letter shall be binding upon Iraq;

7. Decides further that, in view of the prolonged interruption by Iraq of the presence of UNMOVIC and the IAEA and in order for them to accomplish the tasks set forth in this resolution and all previous relevant resolutions and notwithstanding prior understandings, the Council hereby establishes the following revised or additional authorities, which shall be binding upon Iraq, to facilitate their work in Iraq:

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall determine the composition of their inspection teams and ensure that these teams are composed of the most qualified and experienced experts available;

– All UNMOVIC and IAEA personnel shall enjoy the privileges and immunities, corresponding to those of experts on mission, provided in the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into and out of Iraq, the right to free, unrestricted, and immediate movement to and from inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and buildings, including immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to Presidential Sites equal to that at other sites, notwithstanding the provisions of resolution 1154 (1998);

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to be provided by Iraq the names of all personnel currently and formerly associated with Iraq’s chemical, biological, nuclear, and ballistic missile programmes and the associated research, development, and production facilities;

– Security of UNMOVIC and IAEA facilities shall be ensured by sufficient United Nations security guards;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to declare, for the purposes of freezing a site to be inspected, exclusion zones, including surrounding areas and transit corridors, in which Iraq will suspend ground and aerial movement so that nothing is changed in or taken out of a site being inspected;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and landing of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned reconnaissance vehicles;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right at their sole discretion verifiably to remove, destroy, or render harmless all prohibited weapons, subsystems, components, records, materials, and other related items, and the right to impound or close any facilities or equipment for the production thereof; and

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to free import and use of equipment or materials for inspections and to seize and export any equipment, materials, or documents taken during inspections, without search of UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or official or personal baggage;

8. Decides further that Iraq shall not take or threaten hostile acts directed against any representative or personnel of the United Nations or the IAEA or of any Member State taking action to uphold any Council resolution;

9. Requests the Secretary-General immediately to notify Iraq of this resolution, which is binding on Iraq; demands that Iraq confirm within seven days of that notification its intention to comply fully with this resolution; and demands further that Iraq cooperate immediately, unconditionally, and actively with UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their mandates, including on Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited items, and by recommending sites to be inspected, persons to be interviewed, conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected, the results of which shall be reported to the Council by UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
fuck off
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Oh my God. You have absolutely no idea what you just quoted, do you?
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

And woooo! You found a resolution in 1990 authorising the coalition to kick Iraq out of Kuwait! Woooo, that's usefull! What's that, a ticket to start wars with Iraq till the end of time? :lol:
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

BoredShirtless wrote:Oh my God. You have absolutely no idea what you just quoted, do you?
I quoted the UN resolution that gave the authorized member states legal athority to enforce Iraqi breeches of Security Council resolutions as they saw fit. Cumstain.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:Oh my God. You have absolutely no idea what you just quoted, do you?
I quoted the UN resolution that gave the authorized member states legal athority to enforce Iraqi breeches of Security Council resolutions as they saw fit. Cumstain.
You fucking retard. Resolution 1441 authorised inspections only. In case you missed the UK and the USA's repeated attempts to get a new resolution, 1441 was not enough to justify the use of force. You're way out of your depth here fuckhead. Why don't you send me your work address, and I'll mail you some crayons to play with.
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

BoredShirtless wrote:And woooo! You found a resolution in 1990 authorising the coalition to kick Iraq out of Kuwait! Woooo, that's usefull! What's that, a ticket to start wars with Iraq till the end of time? :lol:
Hey fuckface READ THE GODDAMN QUOTE! This is the 2002 Resolution authorizing the use of force to bring Iraq into compliance with all past Security Council Resolutions.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:And woooo! You found a resolution in 1990 authorising the coalition to kick Iraq out of Kuwait! Woooo, that's usefull! What's that, a ticket to start wars with Iraq till the end of time? :lol:
Hey fuckface READ THE GODDAMN QUOTE! This is the 2002 Resolution authorizing the use of force to bring Iraq into compliance with all past Security Council Resolutions.
Wrong. But at least you're constant.
User avatar
Gambler
Youngling
Posts: 145
Joined: 2002-07-13 02:11pm
Location: Aachen, Germany

Post by Gambler »

Oh please Col. Crackpot, Resolution 1441 didn't give the USA the right to invade Iraq no matter how much you or the Bush administration spin it. Nowhere in the dokument does it say that the USA can attack on its own without the approval of the security council and you are forgetting that this resolution was made by consensus after another resolution draft wich allowed the USA and Britain the use of force had been dismissed. Also you ignore the efforts of the Bush administration to get a second resolution to approve their invasion of Iraq and when they saw they had only 4 votes out of 15 on their side, they simply decided on their own that another resolution wasn't necessary. So here we are a year later and your repeating the lies of the Bush administration.
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Gambler wrote:and you are forgetting
That's impossible, because he never gets it to begin with. He's just another mindless drone. A sheep who can't think for himself.
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

while not perfect, the US and UK are in line with the resolutions. Granted there is some ambiguity, but war crimes? fuck no.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29312
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by Vympel »

Col.,

A: BoredShirtless, in referring to 1990, is referring to the part of your quote highlighted in yellow- see above. The mere fact that 1441 'recalls' prior resolutions has no bearing on what it authorizes in 2002, and it does not authorize the use of force anywhere in the resolution. The fact that the US and UK sought a second resolution also puts the lie to the claim that 1441 was an authorization of force; even in their own minds.

B: Gambler made the argument quite well, no need to repeat.

Why must we go over this repeatedly? The fanciful arguments that have been conjured up to make it out as if military action was authorized by the UN resolutions are absurd, and have been shot down repeatedly by quite a few people.

Here's the ones I've heard, as a summary:

1. 1441 authorizes force. See above.

2. The 1990 resolutions authorize force. Retarded argument. They pertain to the liberation of Kuwait, and say nothing about invading Iraq either for the purposes of regime change or because of Iraqi noncompliance. In addition, all resolutions pertaining to 1990/91 vest complete authority in the UNSC, and the UNSC alone.

3. The Iraqis broke the cease fire: again, the resolutions that *are* the cease fire agreement do not stipulate an invasion of Iraq as a result of breach, and furthermore, were signed by all member states- it is thus impossible for one or two of those member states (the US and UK) to draw legal justification from this. In addition, the reasoning from 2 also applies.

4. The Iraqis were shooting at our planes .... which were flying over the Iraqis own sovereign territory (which every resolution affirms) creatively trying to 'enforce' by military action a resolution which was not enacted under Ch VII of the UN charter, thereby making military action to enforce it ... illegal.

That some can claim that resolution after resolution which affirms Iraqi sovereignty and vests complete authority to act in the UNSC somehow authorizes the US to go in unilaterally as it sees fit is ridiculous.

In conclusion, drop the legal arguments.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

You've got no excuses now Crackpot. Vympel just laid it all out for you in one clear, easy to read post. Don't be a sucker dude.
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

Vympel, i did conceide that it was not the ideal situation. My running issue with BS is that it does not rise to the level of a war crime. I still do not see anything that can make the case that Bush committed a war crime.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Breaking Internation Law is the issue here, not war crimes.
User avatar
Col. Crackpot
That Obnoxious Guy
Posts: 10228
Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Post by Col. Crackpot »

backpedaling again you cumstain?
In the SD.net Presidentail Election thread, Bored Shirtless wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat! George Bush is a war criminal, and so are the flock of Hawks he keeps on his staff. They should all be tried at the Hague. Go Kerry.
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=25
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

Col. Crackpot wrote:backpedaling again you cumstain?
In the SD.net Presidentail Election thread, Bored Shirtless wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat! George Bush is a war criminal, and so are the flock of Hawks he keeps on his staff. They should all be tried at the Hague. Go Kerry.
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=25
Your attempt to nitpick the wording of my label for George has failed. To see what I mean, once again for your viewing pleasure the Nürnberg Tribunal, principle VI:

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity:

Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
The United States is guilty of crimes against peace, the section I highlighted in yellow. So how should I describe George Bush? As a war criminal or a peace criminal? Didn't the United States break section (a) by waging war? Thus, "war criminal" is accurate. Bitch, you're too easy.
HemlockGrey
Fucking Awesome
Posts: 13834
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:21pm

Post by HemlockGrey »

Whilst in Beijing, I thought I heard on CNN that the UN recently passed a resolution authorizing the US invasion. Was I hallucinating, or was this for real?
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses

"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
User avatar
BoredShirtless
BANNED
Posts: 3107
Joined: 2003-02-26 10:57am
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Post by BoredShirtless »

HemlockGrey wrote:Whilst in Beijing, I thought I heard on CNN that the UN recently passed a resolution authorizing the US invasion. Was I hallucinating, or was this for real?
You were hallucinating. Please see your doctor if symptoms persist.
HemlockGrey
Fucking Awesome
Posts: 13834
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:21pm

Post by HemlockGrey »

Must have been the water.
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses

"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
Post Reply