![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
2. I think it was after but I'm not sure. 3. I'm not sure I understand this whole question. With regard to the part about inspectors, Saddam would go back and forth. He wasn't cooperating with the inspectors. He was playing a lot of cat and mouse games. Once he saw that we were serious and we were going to invade, then he became more cooperative. So the answer is "yes" that I think there were inspectors there at the time, but that's irrelevant because much of the time leading up to that time, Saddam had not been cooperating with the inspectors. I don't understand your question about the "no-fly" zone. I do know that Saddam had been firing on our planes there for several years. 4. I don't know if there are plans for military bases. It would not surprise me if there were. We have bases in the countries of several of our allies. 5. Yes, but thanks to the insurgency attacking the pipelines, the oil is not producing all that much revenue. 6. I don't know who Brown Kellog and Root are. I think a big company like Haliburton has ties to politicians in both parties. Cheney used to work there. 7. I don't know what your definition of "fairly" is. I don't know if you are referring to the prisoners at Gutanomo or where. The prisoners at Guantanomo are interrogated very aggresively. All types of techniques including sleep deprivation and things like that are used. The prisoners are certainly treated far worse than they would be if they were being held in jail in America. In America, they read you Miranda rights. On the other hand, these prisoners are being treated a helluva lot better than they would be if we sent them back to their own countries. Do you know what they would do to them at the prisons in Egypt or Saudi Arabia?If we sent them there, they would wish they were back at Guantanomo. With regard to the "habeus corpus" thing, I think that a judge just ruled that we can't contiue with the current practices at Guantanomo. But that doesn't mean anything. Every legal scholar that I've listened to both liberal and conservative said the judge's ruling has little or no basis in law and will surely be overturned.. they said the judge's rling was titally partisan and the arguments she made were very poor. Last edited by Rupert Pupkin : 09-19-2006 at 06:21 PM. |