FrankChurch wrote:Remember, we attacked South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh was not the evil one it was Diem, the democratically elected leader of South Vietnam. He was killed, because the South wanted to control their economy. The US called that Communism, because they wanted to help their buddies France control the economy. The North invaded later. The majority of deaths were in the south.
Yep. That's because all combatants decided that was where the war was. (If the South had invaded the North, that's where the war would've been fought.)
FrankChurch wrote:The Gulf War was illegal because we didn't have a war resolution voted on by Congress. The UN should have sent peacekeepers. There's even possible evidence that Saddam invaded because he thought we told him to. There were also border issues.
UN peacekeepers would have been useless under an Iraqi-occupied Kuwait, and the actions were taken by the US as part of a UN-sanctioned military action. We undertook our role as enforcer of the UN resolution as part of a genuine international coalition.
Such actions don't require Congressional approval, and -- if you would please look up the term -- was justifiable under international laws.
FrankChurch wrote:Afghanistan was also illegal. The Taliban told Bush that they would give him Osama, if Bush gave them evidence that he did 9/11. Bush refused and invaded. Remember, Richard Clarke told us that Bush wanted to invade Iraq instead. There was also evidence that an invasion of Afghanistan would create famine that would kill around 3 million people. It didn't happen, but it could have.
A military response to an attack is a legitimate and recognized use of power by the international community. Bin Laden's organization was recognized, early, on, as the responsible party, and he their leader.
Guys: Look up the difference between "Justifiable" and all the other terms you guys are now introducing into the debate.