English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-04-07 13:41:01 · 12 answers · asked by Bud#21 4 in Politics & Government Military

I just realized that I wrote condoned rather than condone. sorry.

2007-04-07 20:47:07 · update #1

12 answers

1) A clear threat to my own freedom or security
2) An ongoing genocide or mass-murder
3) An attack on the forces of my country or a close ally's by an official army.

I'd condone a military strike on Sudan's air facilities. I wouldn't condone an attack on Iran.

2007-04-07 13:44:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The bombing of the training camps in Afghanistan and taking out the Taliban was right on the mark. That is who attacked the U.S. We should have stayed there and finished the job.
Who could argue with that?

Iraq was an illegal preemptive attack based on questionable intelligence and entered into under weird circumstances with little planning and thought for what would happen after Saddam Hussein was gone. Bad move.

2007-04-07 20:51:49 · answer #2 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 1 1

Good question. An attack on this country--including 9/11--certainly justifies the use of military force against the attackers--as in our invasion of Afghanistan.

But even such extreme provocations don not justify the use of force against parties not involved in such an attack, no matter how little liking we may have for them. Which is why the invasion of Iraq was wrong.

2007-04-07 20:47:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

An attempt to assassinate our President.
Breaking a cease-fire by shooting at our planes.
Lying and deceiving a U.N. investigation they agreed to repeatedly while bragging to their allies that they had WMDs.
Supporting terrorists attacks against our allies with money or supplies.
Invading one of our allies and compromising our national interests (Kuwait).

All the things that Saddam/Iraq did.

Why, do you need more?

2007-04-07 21:00:16 · answer #4 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 1 0

9/11.
(Even though it may have been pulled off by George Soros, Move On.org, and the Democrat Party.)
Even if they did, they were still supporting the terrorists.

2007-04-07 20:44:29 · answer #5 · answered by wolf 6 · 0 1

A hell of a lot more than fictional weapons of mass destruction

2007-04-07 20:44:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

any direct threat to the freedom of any american or allied peoples, or any invasion of said people

2007-04-07 21:00:29 · answer #7 · answered by mike_dooley49 3 · 1 0

If our country was attacked, it would warrant use of lethal force.

2007-04-07 20:45:47 · answer #8 · answered by Birdman 7 · 1 0

An attack on our soil.
That's why i support the war in afghanistan

2007-04-07 21:09:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

if it resulted in attacking an ally

2007-04-07 20:51:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers