Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,010,622 members, 7,358,534 topics. Date: Wednesday, 22 March 2023 at 11:07 AM
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / Foreign Affairs / Should George Bush Also Face Trial? (11155 Views)
Senator George Theuri Posts Half-Unclad Picture Of Him And His Wife On Facebook / Amnesty Intl Urges African Countries To Arrest George Bush When He Visits Africa / Some Memorable Quotes Of George Bush (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (Reply) (Go Down)
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by jammin(m): 6:01am On Nov 28, 2006|
hear!! hear!! applauds.
hypocracy at its worst.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 8:59am On Nov 28, 2006|
What pile of junk!!! How can you say they did not decide to kill Iraqis but they went to fight them in their own country? If they had no intention of killing Iraqis, they'd have stayed back at home.
Again, let's put a little more intelligence to use. This post is about George 'war monger' Bush, NOT about Nigeria. If I want to write about Nigeria, I'll write about Nigeria. You were not coerced into posting on this thread so it's either you see it as relevant or you dont.
I'm not arguing, I'm having a discussion here and putting my points across. If you cant take opposition, go and gather imbeciles and brainwash them
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 9:04am On Nov 28, 2006|
Do you know what a forum is? This is not a single thread forum, it's a forum to discuss a variety of things so it does not necessarily have to be about Nigeria. You should feel free to start a thread about what you have done for Nigeria.
The fact that anyone queues at the American embassy to get an American visa does not mean they should become brainless and lose rational thought systems. Maybe, you're an uncle sam who thinks that because America has saved you from your poverty, you cannot EVER see anything wrong in anything American, that's good for you. It's your prerogative.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 9:04am On Nov 28, 2006|
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 1:07pm On Nov 28, 2006|
Wasting valuable space on people like you will not be a good idea, by the way your comment on the issue is neither here nor there, it is not compulsory to contribute especially when you cannot make sense.
I am amazed that you are still trying to justify the very wrong statement about majority of Iraqis supporting the invasion. I should point you to a website? Na wahoo.
You may contact CNN directly via their website to ask such basic question and believe me they will reply you.
Someone stated something about Nigerians complaining about America even when they spend time trying to get visas. Well, it is important to note that not everyone fancies the idea of travelling out of Nigeria and that they spent a lot of time and money attempting to go to the US or have actually gone to the US does not mean that others are like them.
Opposing the wrong things done by the US is better than being blind supporter simply because you like a country.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by jammin(m): 1:40pm On Nov 28, 2006|
yeah. thanks for that correction.
i suppose i can blame it on the tiring day that i had
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by texazzpete(m): 2:08pm On Nov 28, 2006|
Everybody can see there are some things wrong with american/americans. but most people realize that not EVERYTHING is wrong with all things american. it's become the pattern for people to take serious flak for daring to say anything positive about the US.
By the way, your comment that my bringing up OBJ as an example is off topic is totally wrong. In trying to buttress my point i'm free to bring up any similar case that comes to mind. and yes, it's stark hypocrisy to condemn one and remain silent on the other, for similar 'crimes'.
but then again, why stop at Bush, why not have a go at blair too, after all, like Bush, he was a driving force behind the war too. and theh british presence in Iraq is also seen as an occupation force. Or is Britain bashing a lot less lucrative than US bashing? please, before you deny, have the decency to read through this topic top to bottom.
by the way, the topic reads "Should George Bush Also Face Trial?". and that is a question you're asking, not a statement. this is a forum and as such any topic is open to debate. just because people answer that question from THEIR own points of view, with THEIR own opinions doesn't mean things should get personal. statements like 'let's put a little more intelligence into this' are inexcusably anti-social.
next time y'all dont want (or can't appreciate) dissenting views, please, please phrase your topic as STATEMENTS or get a blog.
as always, i'm all for peace and knowledge. i'm willing to learn from anyone out there. if i want beef, i'll go to the kitchen
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 4:20pm On Nov 28, 2006|
I dont know how many times this has to be stated for anyone to understand: THIS THREAD IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT GEORGE BUSH SHOULD BE TRIED!!!
Haba , it's a simple question. it's not about whether Obasanjo or Tony Blair should be tried. You can start a thread about whether or not OBJ and Tony Blair should be tried and we'll also contribute. However, to say that one should forget George Bush and concentrate on OBJ smirks of something else.
There are dissenting views here and everyone is free to agree or oppose in a reasonable way (at least that's what I believe). We cant be discussing George Bush and someone says 'dont discuss George Bush; discuss OBJ'. If you want to discuss OBJ, start the discussion and everyone who wants to join will do so
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 6:44pm On Nov 28, 2006|
It is called denial or diversion at its best.
Why people tend to equate any blame for a wrong action for example Bush and his many wrong policies with dislike for the US is something I find supremely difficult to undertand.
If Saddam is being tried and already sentenced to death for sanctioning the killing of some 142(?) villages after he was shot in an assasination attempt then one wonders why Bush should not be tried for lying, invading and not showing any remorse for the carnage in Iraq today where the number of deaths recorded each day is becoming mere statistics.
There can never be peace unless you have justice and fairplay. The double standards and hypocrisy of many powerful countries stink to high heavens.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 9:32pm On Nov 28, 2006|
Afam, you're right. They're trying to employ diversionary tactics
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by texazzpete(m): 10:17am On Nov 29, 2006|
i never said let's discuss OBJ and forget Bush. I'm merely using the same logic Jesus used when he said "first remove the log in your eye before removing the speck of dust in your neighbour's eye". i'm sorry if you can't see that.
'They'? I'm presenting my own views here, not that of any group of people as far as i know. this 'We against Them' mentality is always frustrating.
The carnage in Iraq today, was it sanctioned by president Bush? Whatever his reasons (financial or otherwise) for invading Iraq, ultimately the Americans hoped to set Iraq as an example of democracy in the Middle east. call it naive optimism but the carnage and chaos in iraq was not envisaged by the perhaps overly optimistic US war planners. 99.99% of the killings in Iraq today happen at the hands of Iraqis themselves. While this would never have happened without the Invasion, the Iraqis themselves chose to escalate the conflict, deliberately fuelling simmering religious tensions. without a brutal dctator to suppress such tensions, iraq is burning. perhaps if bush had been as ruthless and brutal as saddam, this would never have happened, but i'm pretty sure any tough measures would have led to further howls of outrage.
bush has publicly admitted that the war on iraq was based on flawed intelligence reports and recommendations. so what exactly do you mean by 'show remorse'? perhaps you hope that a video of him shedding crocodile tears over iraq would do wonders to appease the warring parties in iraq?
i agree with you, justice and fairplay go hand in hand with peace. But i don't think the crimes committed by bush and saddam are comparable. one killed knowingly, willingly and brutally. the other made a foolish blunder that has led to the death of many. but most of these deaths were not at his hand. that's the distinction i make here.
at least we all agree that saddam deserves his fate
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 10:48am On Nov 29, 2006|
No, I do not agree that Bush made a mistake or that the intelligence was flawed, Bush never hid his intention to remove Saddam who he once refered to as someone that tried to kill his dad.
In terms of numbers, I believe Saddam was indeed a saint when compared to the number of deaths Bush is responsible for in iraq.
Putting some of these issues in perspective, it is correct to state that Bush is not the one killing the Iraqis because he is not firing shots there, it is equally correct to state that Saddam did not kill Iraqis because he wasn't firing the shots either just as Abacha did not kill any Nigerian with a pistol (at least to the best of my knowledge).
Why was Saddam tried and executed? For signing or ordering or sanctioning the execution of over 140 people in a failed assasination attempt. We are talking about a military head of state, engaged in a war with Iran being shot at while visiting a village in Dujail in 1982.
Those that were executed were tried in the law courts (even if the process was flawed, I am assuming this as I do not have any info on this) and just like Bush (both Jnr and Snr) have signed more execution orders than any 2 politicians in the recent history of America.
If I may ask, what did the US say when the killing took place? Nothing. Because the US found in Iraq an ally that was at war with its enemy, Iran. See the hypocrisy and double standards?
My dear, the US invaded Iraq and handed Saddam over to his enemies, the Shia people abi na Shittes dem dey call them. What do you expect? Even lawyers from US faulted the proceedings in the Saddam trial and the world knew before hand what the verdict was going to be.
So, Bush, Blair & co are responsible for the killing of many innocent lives in Iraq today.
Bush is responsible for the level of insurgency in Iraq today.
Bush presented Al qaeda with a powerful incentive for young and angry muslims to join al qaeda, Bush did what Osama would not have been able to do.
Iraq never witnessed a single suicide attack in its history before the illegal invasion by the US, today we know Iraq is the hottest recruiting ground for terrorists.
Iraq had a christain under Saddam as the second most powerful man in Iraq even when the population of christains in Iraq was less than 4%, today for the first time in a very very long time churches are being burned and the democracy has produced a government that is increasingly asking for an Islamic state of Iraq which in a way will strenghten Iran since the Shiites are mainly supported by Iran and Saddam always pushed for a secular state as against an Islamic one.
Take care, like your thought provoking threads.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 11:33pm On Nov 29, 2006|
Can u plz look at the Brooking instituition's Iraq index published in Sept 2006 .I tried to attach it here on the post but it is up to 500KB and I could not hyperlink it despite trying.Check on www.iraqanalysis.org and then click on the opinion polls and then the Brookings instituition's report and read for yourself. www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
77 percent of Iraqis thought the invasion was worth it despite the troubles they have been through.You say that Shia people are enemies of Saddam,funny enough most Iraqis are Shias.But Saddam was also more hated by the Kurds who form 20 percent of the country.I f Shias who form 60 percent of the population and Kurds 20 percent ,together 80 percent,are enemies of Sadddam,I wonder on what basis u claim that Iraqis prefer Sadddam .That defys logic
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 8:57am On Nov 30, 2006|
This is at best a misunderstanding and at worst, a diversionary tactic.
Is the toppling of Saddam equal to the suffering and carnage being experienced daily by Iraqis at the moment?
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 1:12pm On Nov 30, 2006|
I raised it because Afam virtually accussed me of being dishonest when i said that opinion polls show that most Iraqis in Iraq say that despite the suffering that they are going through,they feel the invasion is worth it .When asked to substantiate his assertion, he asked me to go and ask CNN
You asked whether the suffering that Iraqis go through is equal to the toppling of Saddam-well aparently most Iraqis feel that the toppling of Saddam is what the sufffering.77 percent said it is worth the suffering in a poll done in Sept 2006
Lets face it,most people don't care about what the ordinary Iraqis are going through,this is all about how we see America in the world.Why don't u notice their is no one discussing the carnage in Darfur or even the DRC Congo on nairaland,where 3.7 million people have died.These are our fellow Africans.People are more interested in cricising America in general and George Bush in particular than what Iraqis feel.
Honestly speaking,I don't know how old u are,but can u recall when Saddam's forces killled 150,000 Shias in the 90s .It barely made the news.If nairaland existed then,we wont be discussing Iraq then because there was no America to blame.What about the Anfal campaign when about 100,000-180,000 Kurds where killed?Do u recall that making news?
Should George Bush face trial because he initiated what most Iraqis think was worth it?The present killings in Iraq are mainly due to an inevitable power struggle between different sects most of whom were brutally slaughtered in the Saddam years.The Americans were incompetent in handling the opost invasion Iraq,but that is not grounds for putting them on trial.
Most Iraqis are against the continued prescence of US troops,who they feel have outlived their usefulness but the Iraqi Govt feels that they cannot cope on their own yet and the UN unanimously gave the Coalition the mandate to remain their so long as the Iraqi Govt requet it.Let us analyse these issues without being sucked into the anti-american bandwagon
I f most Iraqis who have lived in Iraq and continue to live there think it is worth toppling Saddam, so be it.The issue we need to discuss is how Iraqis can move on post- Saddam.While we are discussing the welfare of Arabs,I am sure on Arab forums they are not spending most of their time wondering about conflicts in Africa,whether or not President Al Bashir needs to face trial because of the genocide in Darfur.
Sometimes I wish that President Bush will invade Sudan so that people will suddenly develop an interest in the welfare of Sudanese people.For the moment all he is doing is leading the fight to punish Sudan at the Security Council and sending food aid to the starving-80 percent of food aid to Sudan comes from America
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 2:10pm On Nov 30, 2006|
I initially didn't bother visiting the websites you referenced because results of surveys and polls are freely announced on Western media like CNN, BBC etc. I never base my comments on what someone posts online as many online sources may be too subjective, I prefer information that is readily available to the vast majority of people and in this case most of the journalists are actually embedded in the coalition forces structure so information they provide should ordinarily support the US but when it goes as far as telling the whole world that a greater majority of Iraqis are against the invasion mainly due to the carnage today, I respect for being objective.
Now, I checked the links and the information on the home page isn't encouraging especially as regards the point you are trying to make. I can't find the part on Polls let alone the report you claimed that stated 77% of Iraqis favoured the invasion as at September.
Please, direct me to the site or the poll proper as I would like to see the report myself.
I actually decided to post this reply because I have noticed that you are now using an unconfirmed premise to base your discussion with statements like[b] I f most Iraqis who have lived in Iraq and continue to live there think it is worth toppling Saddam, so be it[/b]. The statement is in itself very wrong till date.
As regards my asking you to go to CNN and ask them, it may sound crazy but that is your best bet because I do not record CNN news on my machine for me to reply them. When in doubt I do contact CNN to clarify certain things and they do, it's no big deal.
Interesting point you raised about what people said or did when Saddam killed a lot of Shiites. The glaring issue on this is that the US never raised any eyebrows because while these things were going on including the gassing of the Kurds in northern Iraq, the US saw in Saddam a good ally who was waging a war against the enemy of the US, Iran.
It is such double standards and hypocrisy of the US that is pissing a lot of people off.
Again that explains why a lot of leaders in the middle east are not sympathetic to Saddam's fate because Saddam was the only leader in the heart of the middle east that fought against having an islamic state, he prefered secularism and that led to a christain being his second in command even when the population of christains in iraq is less than 4%.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 2:21pm On Nov 30, 2006|
Type into Google "opinion polls of Iraqis in 2006" then Click on www.iraqanalysis.org .Under opinion on Iraq click on Brookings Iraq Index then go to page 50 of the index
The page shows.QUESTIONS TO IRAQIS:THINKING OF ANY HARDSHIPS YOU MIGHT HAVE SUFFERED SINCE THE US-BRITAIN INVASION,DO YOU PERSONALLY THINK THAT OUSTING SADDAM WAS WORTH IT OR NOT
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 2:29pm On Nov 30, 2006|
Your response to the point I made about how people were largely silent when Saddam was massacring the Shias is erroneous.When this was happening the US and BRITAIN helped sponsor the no-fly zones in parts of the South and North of Iraq to stop it .THAT was better than most people who did nothing but only suddenly discovered an interest in Iraqi suffering when it was time to use it to criticise the US
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 4:52pm On Nov 30, 2006|
I will not engage in an endless debate over well documented events.
The issue of no fly zone came after the 1st gulf war, after the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and the subsequent coalition of the willing that had the support of a lot of nations.
You may need to check your information and what you are referencing before talking about erronous information.
The problem with Kurds in the North and Shiites in the South as regards Sunnis started long since or even before Saddam became head of state.
The US never condemned any of the major atrocities commited by Saddam for the reasons earlier stated.
It might even interest you to know that a serving member of the Iraq government today stated that he was able to get to Washington to draw the attention of the crimes being commited by Saddam to those at the White house then and he was politely told that the US was not willing to jeopardise the good relationship they enjoyed with Saddam.
My last word on the issue of Saddam's crimes and the criminal silence that greeted them by the US when the going was good.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 5:11pm On Nov 30, 2006|
If the site that you are referencing is http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55 then there is no need to look for page 50 of a particular site as the site contains more than enough information to show that many do not agree with your position.
Do have a great day.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by TayoD(m): 5:44pm On Nov 30, 2006|
Is the toppling of Saddam equal to the suffering and carnage being experienced daily by Iraqis at the moment?
The next logical question that stares us in the face is: Who are the ones carrying out these carnage? Americans or iraqis?
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 8:16pm On Nov 30, 2006|
That would be tantamount to chasing shadows. We should be asking how the grounds were prepared for them. No one witnessed such carnage even when the idiotic Saddam was dictating events
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 8:35pm On Nov 30, 2006|
It is amazing that u don't let the facts get in the way of ur argument.The no-fly zones were imposed post Gulf War for the massacres that occured after the Gulf War.The fact that u don't know about the history behind the no-fly zones illustrates my point that people did not care about Iraqi suffering when there was no way of blaming America.How can the death of tensof thousands of people in the early 90s escape ur knowledge.
The link I gave addresses the key issue we have been arguing about-do Iraqis say that the topling of Saddam is worth their suffering.Am sure that if the answer was no u wouldhave no difficulty in finding it. Click on the site I hyperlinked,click opinion polls on Iraq and then the Brookings Iraq Index and go to page 51
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by mochafella(m): 9:22pm On Nov 30, 2006|
Haven't been here for a minute, but I'll ask a random question, simply because I do not know. Is it illegal to "declare war" and invade another country. If we were to set aside the moral and "good-neighbour" reasons why countries do not attack each other. Is there actually any statute or a part of the UN charter that makes it illegal for the US to invade Iraq. I know this below is part of the UN charter, but its more "elective" than mandatory.
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
I ask this because it will simply be difficult to prove that G.W wanted "genocide" in Iraq. Yes I think he wanted Iraq's resources or at least a war where he can vote money into people's pockets and probably didn't really care who got killed. However if it can't be proven that the war was illegal based on some statute or that "genocide" was the intended result of the conflict then it becomes difficult i.e. virtually impossible to try him.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by 4Play(m): 11:49pm On Nov 30, 2006|
the invasion was done carried out under the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1441,which required Iraq to comply with all previous Security Council resolutions or face "serious consequences".
The present Coalition prescence in Iraq was unanimously approved by the Security Council and was unanimously extended this week at the request of Iraq
I posed a question to those who sat that the US invaded Iraq for oil to explain to me precisely how US oil interests is furthered by such an invasion.Till now I have not got a feedback
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Seun(m): 12:05am On Dec 01, 2006|
the invasion was done carried out under the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1441,which required Iraq to comply with all previous Security Council resolutions or face "serious consequences".How silly of you not to be able to see the difference between "serious consequences" and an invasion.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by mochafella(m): 12:17am On Dec 01, 2006|
4 Play:Well, if that makes the war legal, then those asking for a trial are wasting their time. Frankly based on what I have read, setting aside moral arguments, any war is legal provided the combatants' parliaments agree to the war. i.e Nigeria can invade Cameroon tomorrow if the Nigerian parliament agrees with OBJ to do so. yikes.
4 Play:I assume this is directed at me. I do prefer to beleive that the war is more GW & friends handwork than some nationwide conspiracy however here are my reasons.
Halliburton has being pumping Iraq's oil, unmetered, since the invasion/occupation started. I also sincerely doubt they are paying the Iraqi government full price for the "declared" barrels.
Political pressure, a friendlier government than Saddam's will make it easier to control global energy prices regardless of Opec's oil quotas.
Resource access, Iraq is one of the big three in terms of oil reserves. Iran and Russia are the other two I beleive. Oil despite anyone's protestations to the contrary is the dominant source of world energy and will remain so probably for the next half century. Wouldn't it be nice to have one of the big three firmly in your pocket.
Those are the reasons why "US" interests are furthered by the invasion.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 8:46am On Dec 01, 2006|
There was no UN mandate to attack Iraq. I wonder where some get their information from The only thing that was agreed was that Iraq had violated a UN resolution but the UN refused to sanction the American led invasion, go and read up again.
Unanimously approved? oh my God
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Easyy(m): 8:50am On Dec 01, 2006|
Mocha bro, that's what many Bush apologists believe. They believe that as long as the US parliament approves something, it becomes right and binding over the rest of the world
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by Afam(m): 12:48pm On Dec 01, 2006|
I am amazed at the kind of statements you manufacture from thin air and present as facts.
The UN never mandated any invasion of Iraq.
The US made it clear that it was ready to invade Iraq and that it will not guarantee the safety of the IAEA inspectors if they didn't leave Iraq immediately.
Even when France, China and Russia (3 out of the 5 permanent members of the security council) made their intentions known that they will veto the move at the security council the US decided against that as it was going to be a major blow.
IAEA made it crystal clear that there was no evidence that Iraq had the capability or was even developing any WMDs and even the US collaborated this after waging an illegal war against Iraq. Even the UN Sec Gen stated this on CNN that the US led invasion was illegal.
I feel like throwing up when I read people write absolute lies and attempt to spread same.
On no fly zones, it is ridiculous that after explaining to you when the no fly zones were imposed you turn around and talk about my not knowing the history.
A little information for you to assimilate, Iraqi troops killed a lot of Shias in the Southern Iraq when they were retreating from the coalition onslaught and they killed those Iraqis that supported the coalition and that is normal in any war situation as even your country men can be killed for aiding and supporting an enemy in a war situation. I believe you are not aware of the reasons for the killings hence your constant reference to them.
There are a lot of well documented events where Saddam ordered the killing of innocent people and this one certainly belongs to another class.
It is either you do not understand what you read or you are confused.
You are here still asking me to visit a particular website and proceed to page 50 and now 51 to see a particular poll that stated that the Iraqis favoured the invasion even when countless surveys and polls conducted across so many frontiers and media point to the fact that majority oppose the invasion in Iraq but for the early stages of the war.
Do yourself a favour, take time to understand anything before putting them down as some of your statements actually make the discussion look childish with the level of wrong statements and outright lies.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by TayoD(m): 6:53pm On Dec 01, 2006|
That would be tantamount to chasing shadows. We should be asking how the grounds were prepared for them. No one witnessed such carnage even when the idiotic Saddam was dictating eventsThis is just an attempt to side-step a clear answer. It is not the U.S that is comitting the genocide, rather it is the Iraqis themselves and some Americans are dying to keep the situation under control.
What are the grounds that the U.S. created to justify the actions of these blood-thristy fanatics? Is it not the same situation that the Christians and the Kurds are faced with? Why aren't they carrying out the bombings as we see the Shias and Sunnis doing?
If you really want to know the grounds, then go back to the time Mohammed died and trace the history of the Shias and the Sunnis. This is not the first time they have been on such murderous quest to annihilate each other.
|Re: Should George Bush Also Face Trial? by mochafella(m): 8:14pm On Dec 01, 2006|
Erm, from what I can see any country can take advantage of the same loopholes in the UN charter. Does anyone know a section of the UN charter that mandatorily prohibits war, except in self-defence.
I know for example that Japan previously(1945? - 2003) had a non-violent constitution that specifically prohibited deploying combatant troops outside the "home islands". This was changed after the Iraq invasion so they could send combatants to join the coalition. However they are the only country I know that has such a statute.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (Reply)
India Prepares To Boost Russian Coal Imports Amid Western Sanctions / Israel Plans Nuclear Strike On Iran / Barack Obama's Speech At The DNC 2012
|Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health |
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket
Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2023 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 435