Starting with the latest, Robin, following your logic, the French should not have resisted the Germans in WWII because their laws against their country being invaded did not take into account the REASON for the German attack. You yap about law when you know nothing about it.

Just what does Australian law have to say about the rights of someone who is in the country illegally? When you find out, let us know. until then, don't prate about OUR laws if you don't even know your own.

As for this: "Yes, some people who were terrorists working from an organisation based in Afghanistan, not Iraq, committed a violent act that magically left an undamaged wallet from the back pocket of the pilot sitting on top of the rubble."

This statement suggests that you think that the World Trade Center bombing was either staged or faked. Surely you are not as big a fool as that.

I used 9/11 as an example to show what these radical Islamists are capable of. Because it happened, Robin. And it will probably happen again. And then you will scream that the US should have stopped it. How? Why by capitulating, of course. After all, what right do we have to defend our country and way of life? A Talliban style theocracy would be ok and then everyone would be happy because the US would no longer be the big dog on the block.


Next, Clint, you still haven't answeres my last question but never mind. Just how are the Gitmo detainees being "tortured" and what is the source of your info.

Heric, I think that they are splitting legal hairs here. If they were on US SOIL, the Supreme Court would apply. But thet are not, techinally, since the US does not "own" Gtimo base. I'm not a lawyer but I am very familiar with the hair-splitting that can go on in legal matters. Remember Clinton asking what the prosecutor meant by "is"?

1947, please define torture (with examples) and innocent people. And don't worry about our asking Canada to help. We know that you have plenty of shame to bear already. As for where I got the info on the re-patriated detainees who went back to being terrorists, I watched the Congressional hearings. The informantio comes from testimony before a congressional committee.

dick greenhaus, I believe that if you will check your figures, you will find that most Iraqi civilian deaths can be traced to terrorist activity since the taking of Baghdad. Most of those killed prior to that time were in fact Iraqi military or were caught up in military action. I forget the numbers now but the number of civilian deaths in WWII was staggering- somewhere in the millions.

Last time I looked, war was considered a good reason for people getting killed and I haven't noticed the entire country rising up against the Coallition Forces either. Democratic elections have been held and, just recently, the "insurgents" have hinted that they might like to talk.

The terrorist bombings now being carried out in Iraq are partially Saddams old Baathist Party, the minority Sunnis who ruled under Saddam, or foreign Islamist terrorists such as al Queda operatives.

Liz, why don't you check and see how many British soldiers have killed by "friendly fire" in some of the wars in the past. No one who has not been in combat should blindly criticize what happens in a fire-fight. If you have not been shot at, put a sock in it.

One last thing; regarding my name. I have been "troll" since before the days of CB radio. I explained the name years ago on a thread about how we all got our names.

I am not "a Troll" in the internet sense although I do have strong opinions, which I express freely. Everyone is intitled to my opinion.

troll