Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sandintoes who wrote (17337)	9/22/2004 3:27:58 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Have the UK, Poland and all the others ceded their sovereign authority over their armies to us by sending them into Iraq in operations with ours?

To: sandintoes who wrote (17337)	9/22/2004 3:32:11 PM
From: JeffA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Our troops should not be under UN control. They work to preserve our US Constitution against foes domestic and foreign. They do NOT work to preserve the rights of the Hutus or Tutsis to hack each other to death, they do not work to keep Aristede in office because we like him, they do not work to keep genocide from occurring in the Sudan. When the Sudan ignores the UN directive just issued, and they will, people of the world and Kerry dems will ask, why are US troops not enforcing human laws down there. I say let the UN handle that one. If they don't go, we don't have to go. They don't care enough to send troops neither do we. This UN thing is a double edged sword. Not only will the UN have to send troops, they will have to pay a fair share of our deployment. Now, I ask, why does the UN have troops? It would seemingly be against their charter.