Discussion:
Why have the french invaded Ivory Coast
(too old to reply)
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-06 23:01:00 UTC
Permalink
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?

Why are they sending moor troops?

Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?

Why aren't the left demanding they leave?

Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?

Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
emmanuel
2004-11-07 01:27:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your Iraqi
Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping mission.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7657.doc.htm
Post by Mosley Jones III
Why are they sending moor troops?
Because Gbagbo is using the weapons he got from your good friend Qadhafi
against civilians and French Peace-keepers (note that he also killed an
american civilian).


<snip>
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-07 01:51:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your Iraqi
Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Post by emmanuel
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7657.doc.htm
Post by Mosley Jones III
Why are they sending moor troops?
Because Gbagbo is using the weapons he got from your good friend Qadhafi
against civilians and French Peace-keepers (note that he also killed an
american civilian).
maybe the French should look at their own policies in Africa for a reason
for why they were attacked
Post by emmanuel
<snip>
emmanuel
2004-11-07 02:55:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.

Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.

Can't you ?
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 03:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-07 03:47:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7657.doc.htm
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 04:10:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the French
were actively involved in the war, and the time the resolution was passed?

Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?

See this link.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm

The last line of the article speaks volumes.

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-07 05:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000
civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the
French were actively involved in the war, and the time the resolution
was passed?
Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?
Of course.
War, diplomacy and commun sense at the same time.
This is an African problem, it's about time that the Africans start
fixing their own problems and France beeing an old colonial power, French
troops are more efficient, considering the mission, if they work for /
support African states troops (ECOWACS) in teh peacekeeping mission.
Post by Don Wagner
See this link.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm
The last line of the article speaks volumes.
Well... the last line sounds uncorrect to me (see res.1528)
The UNOCI is just and improved/extended ECOWACS. And just like the French
only supported the ECOWACS, for good reasons I believe, they are going to
support the UNOCI. The French mission in Ivory Coast has more to do with
disuasion.
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 06:45:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the
French were actively involved in the war, and the time the resolution
was passed?
Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?
Of course.
War, diplomacy and commun sense at the same time.
This is an African problem, it's about time that the Africans start
fixing their own problems and France beeing an old colonial power, French
troops are more efficient, considering the mission, if they work for /
support African states troops (ECOWACS) in teh peacekeeping mission.
Post by Don Wagner
See this link.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm
The last line of the article speaks volumes.
Well... the last line sounds uncorrect to me (see res.1528)
The UNOCI is just and improved/extended ECOWACS. And just like the French
only supported the ECOWACS, for good reasons I believe, they are going to
support the UNOCI. The French mission in Ivory Coast has more to do with
disuasion.
Resolution 1528 only calls for ECOWAS to liase with the French. As well,
the Military authorized by 1528 does not include the 4000 or so French
Troops.

Who are the French disuadeing? So far they seem to have both sides
pissed off. Much like the U.S. in Iraq.

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-07 17:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the
French were actively involved in the war, and the time the
resolution was passed?
Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?
Of course.
War, diplomacy and commun sense at the same time.
This is an African problem, it's about time that the Africans start
fixing their own problems and France beeing an old colonial power,
French troops are more efficient, considering the mission, if they
work for / support African states troops (ECOWACS) in teh
peacekeeping mission.
Post by Don Wagner
See this link.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm
The last line of the article speaks volumes.
Well... the last line sounds uncorrect to me (see res.1528)
The UNOCI is just and improved/extended ECOWACS. And just like the
French only supported the ECOWACS, for good reasons I believe, they
are going to support the UNOCI. The French mission in Ivory Coast has
more to do with disuasion.
Resolution 1528 only calls for ECOWAS to liase with the French. As
well, the Military authorized by 1528 does not include the 4000 or so
French Troops.
From res. 1528 :

"-11. Authorizes for a period of 12 months from 4 April 2004 the French
forces to use all necessary means in order to support UNOCI in accordance
with the agreement to be reached between UNOCI and the French authorities,
and in particular to:

Contribute to the general security of the area of activity of the
international forces,
Intervene at the request of UNOCI in support of its elements whose security
may be threatened,
Intervene against belligerent actions, if the security conditions so
require, outside the areas directly controlled by UNOCI,
Help to protect civilians, in the deployment areas of their units;"
Post by Don Wagner
Who are the French disuadeing? So far they seem to have both sides
pissed off. Much like the U.S. in Iraq.
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.

Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?

I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.

But what about you ?
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 18:12:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the
French were actively involved in the war, and the time the
resolution was passed?
Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?
Of course.
War, diplomacy and commun sense at the same time.
This is an African problem, it's about time that the Africans start
fixing their own problems and France beeing an old colonial power,
French troops are more efficient, considering the mission, if they
work for / support African states troops (ECOWACS) in teh
peacekeeping mission.
Post by Don Wagner
See this link.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm
The last line of the article speaks volumes.
Well... the last line sounds uncorrect to me (see res.1528)
The UNOCI is just and improved/extended ECOWACS. And just like the
French only supported the ECOWACS, for good reasons I believe, they
are going to support the UNOCI. The French mission in Ivory Coast has
more to do with disuasion.
Resolution 1528 only calls for ECOWAS to liase with the French. As
well, the Military authorized by 1528 does not include the 4000 or so
French Troops.
"-11. Authorizes for a period of 12 months from 4 April 2004 the French
forces to use all necessary means in order to support UNOCI in accordance
with the agreement to be reached between UNOCI and the French authorities,
Contribute to the general security of the area of activity of the
international forces,
Intervene at the request of UNOCI in support of its elements whose security
may be threatened,
Intervene against belligerent actions, if the security conditions so
require, outside the areas directly controlled by UNOCI,
Help to protect civilians, in the deployment areas of their units;"
Post by Don Wagner
Who are the French disuadeing? So far they seem to have both sides
pissed off. Much like the U.S. in Iraq.
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.
Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
Why are more French troops being sent at this moment? Why did the U.S. agree
to
finance Ecowas? The U'S dropped its objections to the peackeeping force
months
ago.
Post by emmanuel
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?
Ask the French. Maybe it's for Cocoa. You made up the myth that the U.S.
invaded Iraq for the oil, do the same for Ivory Coast.
Post by emmanuel
I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
And this means what?
Post by emmanuel
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.
So are millions of others in the world. Did you know that Gbagbo didn't
start
the civil war?
Post by emmanuel
But what about you ?
What about me?
emmanuel
2004-11-07 19:41:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
What did you call it in the 18 months or so between the time the
French were actively involved in the war, and the time the
resolution was passed?
Why does the resolution not include the French as peacekeepers but
anly as "supporting the ECOWAS troops"? Maybe because France
would not become part of the peacekeeping contingent?
Of course.
War, diplomacy and commun sense at the same time.
This is an African problem, it's about time that the Africans start
fixing their own problems and France beeing an old colonial power,
French troops are more efficient, considering the mission, if they
work for / support African states troops (ECOWACS) in teh
peacekeeping mission.
Post by Don Wagner
See this link.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ivory-coast.htm
The last line of the article speaks volumes.
Well... the last line sounds uncorrect to me (see res.1528)
The UNOCI is just and improved/extended ECOWACS. And just like the
French only supported the ECOWACS, for good reasons I believe, they
are going to support the UNOCI. The French mission in Ivory Coast
has more to do with disuasion.
Resolution 1528 only calls for ECOWAS to liase with the French. As
well, the Military authorized by 1528 does not include the 4000 or
so French Troops.
"-11. Authorizes for a period of 12 months from 4 April 2004 the
French forces to use all necessary means in order to support UNOCI in
accordance with the agreement to be reached between UNOCI and the
Contribute to the general security of the area of activity of the
international forces,
Intervene at the request of UNOCI in support of its elements whose security
may be threatened,
Intervene against belligerent actions, if the security conditions so
require, outside the areas directly controlled by UNOCI,
Help to protect civilians, in the deployment areas of their units;"
Post by Don Wagner
Who are the French disuadeing? So far they seem to have both sides
pissed off. Much like the U.S. in Iraq.
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.
Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
Why are more French troops being sent at this moment? Why did the U.S.
agree to
finance Ecowas? The U'S dropped its objections to the peackeeping
force months
ago.
There are more French troops beeing send because the civil war is about to
restart.
As for the US attitude, why did they have objections at the first time to
the enforcement of peace keeping mission ?
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?
Ask the French. Maybe it's for Cocoa. You made up the myth that the
U.S. invaded Iraq for the oil, do the same for Ivory Coast.
The French are there precisely because they don't want a civil war.
As for the Cocoa... Sure... Gbagbo met Philip Merrill and Stephen Hayes in
NY to talk about Cocoa. He also gave to US citizens immunity to the Hague
based International Criminal Court (ICC) because American citizens looove
Ivorian Cocoa... Sure ...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
And this means what?
As I said... It means that Halliburton looooves Ivorian Cocoa
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.
So are millions of others in the world. Did you know that Gbagbo
didn't start the civil war?
He didn't start it, but the Christian militias in Abidjan are taking their
orders directly from the presidential palace. It's no big secret they want
to restart the war. Of course, without his planes and helicopters, Gbagbo
just changed his mind... he now wants the French to stay...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
But what about you ?
What about me?
Do you want a civil war there ?
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 02:09:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.
Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
Why are more French troops being sent at this moment? Why did the U.S.
agree to
finance Ecowas? The U'S dropped its objections to the peackeeping
force months
ago.
There are more French troops beeing send because the civil war is about to
restart.
How can that be? the Frencvh were "peacekeeping" according to you
Post by emmanuel
As for the US attitude, why did they have objections at the first time to
the enforcement of peace keeping mission ?
To point out the hypocrisy of the French intervening in a foreign country
while objecting to the Americans intervening in a foreign country
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?
Ask the French. Maybe it's for Cocoa. You made up the myth that the
U.S. invaded Iraq for the oil, do the same for Ivory Coast.
The French are there precisely because they don't want a civil war.
They do, however want to reassert their influence especially in light of
recent
discoveries of Diamonds and oil. The convenient excuse to destroy the
air force was a lucky break for them.
Post by emmanuel
As for the Cocoa... Sure... Gbagbo met Philip Merrill and Stephen Hayes in
NY to talk about Cocoa. He also gave to US citizens immunity to the Hague
based International Criminal Court (ICC) because American citizens looove
Ivorian Cocoa... Sure ...
What does this have to do with anything?
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
And this means what?
As I said... It means that Halliburton looooves Ivorian Cocoa
It means that youve resorted to innuendo and rumour.
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.
So are millions of others in the world. Did you know that Gbagbo
didn't start the civil war?
He didn't start it, but the Christian militias in Abidjan are taking their
orders directly from the presidential palace. It's no big secret they want
to restart the war. Of course, without his planes and helicopters, Gbagbo
just changed his mind... he now wants the French to stay...
Which Christian militias?
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
But what about you ?
What about me?
Do you want a civil war there ?
No, but then again several thousand Ivory Coasters apparently do, so what
should we do about that?

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-10 03:48:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.
Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
Why are more French troops being sent at this moment? Why did the
U.S. agree to
finance Ecowas? The U'S dropped its objections to the peackeeping
force months
ago.
There are more French troops beeing send because the civil war is
about to restart.
How can that be? the Frencvh were "peacekeeping" according to you
Post by emmanuel
As for the US attitude, why did they have objections at the first
time to the enforcement of peace keeping mission ?
To point out the hypocrisy of the French intervening in a foreign
country while objecting to the Americans intervening in a foreign
country
You're funny... The French were in Ivory Coast because the Ivorians wanted
it. There was, and there still is a military agreement between those two
countries. Even Gbagbo doesn't contest the French presence. Now if you want
to continue with your "French invasion in Ivory Coast" theory, go ahead...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?
Ask the French. Maybe it's for Cocoa. You made up the myth that the
U.S. invaded Iraq for the oil, do the same for Ivory Coast.
The French are there precisely because they don't want a civil war.
They do, however want to reassert their influence especially in light
of recent
discoveries of Diamonds and oil. The convenient excuse to destroy the
air force was a lucky break for them.
Convenient excuse ? Well... they conveniently bombed 9 French soldiers and
an American aid worker, and they conveniently lost their aviation. China
and Russia are quite unhappy that France asked an arm umbargo, so the only
benefit for the French is that this not going to happen again. If you see
something else ...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
As for the Cocoa... Sure... Gbagbo met Philip Merrill and Stephen
Hayes in NY to talk about Cocoa. He also gave to US citizens immunity
to the Hague based International Criminal Court (ICC) because
American citizens looove Ivorian Cocoa... Sure ...
What does this have to do with anything?
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
And this means what?
As I said... It means that Halliburton looooves Ivorian Cocoa
It means that youve resorted to innuendo and rumour.
Rumour ? It's no secret that Halliburton and co are interested by the
Ivorian Oil. A civil war, assuming that Gbagbo wins, would offer a lot of
opportunities to his generous friends. It's even better : the rebels are
muslims... Their militias are no better than the Jeunes Patriotes, so it
could even become the African front of the war on terror... isn't life
sweet ?
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.
So are millions of others in the world. Did you know that Gbagbo
didn't start the civil war?
He didn't start it, but the Christian militias in Abidjan are taking
their orders directly from the presidential palace. It's no big
secret they want to restart the war. Of course, without his planes
and helicopters, Gbagbo just changed his mind... he now wants the
French to stay...
Which Christian militias?
The jeunes patriotes, controled by the government, comes to mind. Note that
there are also Muslim militias in the rebel zone.
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
But what about you ?
What about me?
Do you want a civil war there ?
No, but then again several thousand Ivory Coasters apparently do, so
what should we do about that?
As a starter, keep that to thousands. Obviously, the problem was not 2 jets
and 3 helicopters but the militias on both sides and the people behind
them.
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-10 11:28:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Both sides were at war
Both sides still want war.
The French stopped both sides
and yes, both sides are pissed off.
Now what ?
The French asked for more UN troops but the USA blocked
that as much as they could.
Why are more French troops being sent at this moment? Why did the
U.S. agree to
finance Ecowas? The U'S dropped its objections to the peackeeping
force months
ago.
There are more French troops beeing send because the civil war is
about to restart.
How can that be? the Frencvh were "peacekeeping" according to you
Post by emmanuel
As for the US attitude, why did they have objections at the first
time to the enforcement of peace keeping mission ?
To point out the hypocrisy of the French intervening in a foreign
country while objecting to the Americans intervening in a foreign
country
You're funny... The French were in Ivory Coast because the Ivorians wanted
it.
The prime mister has said as plain as can be for the French to get out,

You said the French were there because the UN resolution gave them the
power.

You were lying weren't you



There was, and there still is a military agreement between those two
Post by emmanuel
countries. Even Gbagbo doesn't contest the French presence. Now if you want
to continue with your "French invasion in Ivory Coast" theory, go ahead...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
So who wants a civil war there ?
How many dead civilians would be acceptable ?
100 000 ? More ? Less ? As many as needed ? For what ?
Ask the French. Maybe it's for Cocoa. You made up the myth that the
U.S. invaded Iraq for the oil, do the same for Ivory Coast.
The French are there precisely because they don't want a civil war.
They do, however want to reassert their influence especially in light
of recent
discoveries of Diamonds and oil. The convenient excuse to destroy the
air force was a lucky break for them.
Convenient excuse ? Well... they conveniently bombed 9 French soldiers and
an American aid worker, and they conveniently lost their aviation. China
and Russia are quite unhappy that France asked an arm umbargo, so the only
benefit for the French is that this not going to happen again. If you see
something else ...
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
As for the Cocoa... Sure... Gbagbo met Philip Merrill and Stephen
Hayes in NY to talk about Cocoa. He also gave to US citizens immunity
to the Hague based International Criminal Court (ICC) because
American citizens looove Ivorian Cocoa... Sure ...
What does this have to do with anything?
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
I can understand that Gbagbo would like to see that.
He has such good relations with Halliburton and Co,
And this means what?
As I said... It means that Halliburton looooves Ivorian Cocoa
It means that youve resorted to innuendo and rumour.
Rumour ? It's no secret that Halliburton and co are interested by the
Ivorian Oil. A civil war, assuming that Gbagbo wins, would offer a lot of
opportunities to his generous friends. It's even better : the rebels are
muslims... Their militias are no better than the Jeunes Patriotes, so it
could even become the African front of the war on terror... isn't life
sweet ?
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
and his wife is a born again christian, member of the foursquare Church.
So are millions of others in the world. Did you know that Gbagbo
didn't start the civil war?
He didn't start it, but the Christian militias in Abidjan are taking
their orders directly from the presidential palace. It's no big
secret they want to restart the war. Of course, without his planes
and helicopters, Gbagbo just changed his mind... he now wants the
French to stay...
Which Christian militias?
The jeunes patriotes, controled by the government, comes to mind. Note that
there are also Muslim militias in the rebel zone.
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
But what about you ?
What about me?
Do you want a civil war there ?
No, but then again several thousand Ivory Coasters apparently do, so
what should we do about that?
As a starter, keep that to thousands. Obviously, the problem was not 2 jets
and 3 helicopters but the militias on both sides and the people behind
them.
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 04:19:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance

http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?OpenElement

What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about were?
A Pillow fight?

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-07 04:31:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Open
Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary means"
Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a trigger to war.

Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If there is
a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic, the IAEA or a
member state, the matter will return to the council for discussions as
required in paragraph 12."

Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better understanding of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 04:55:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Open
Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary means"
Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a trigger to war.
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If there is
a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic, the IAEA or a
member state, the matter will return to the council for discussions as
required in paragraph 12."
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better understanding of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
So you feel that serious consequences are discussion at the U.N.
Interesting.

When did John Negroponte become a Canadian?

Don Wagner
emmanuel
2004-11-07 05:32:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Op
en Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary
means" Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a
trigger to war.
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If
there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic,
the IAEA or a member state, the matter will return to the council for
discussions as required in paragraph 12."
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better
understanding of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
So you feel that serious consequences are discussion at the U.N.
Interesting.
What I, or you, feel doesn't really matter. But what is sure is that
those who signed the resolution 1441 all knew and made it clear that it
didn't authorized war.
Post by Don Wagner
When did John Negroponte become a Canadian?
Sorry. My mistake.
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 06:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Op
en Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary
means" Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a
trigger to war.
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If
there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic,
the IAEA or a member state, the matter will return to the council for
discussions as required in paragraph 12."
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better
understanding of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
So you feel that serious consequences are discussion at the U.N.
Interesting.
What I, or you, feel doesn't really matter. But what is sure is that
those who signed the resolution 1441 all knew and made it clear that it
didn't authorized war.
Where does it say that?

Don Wagner
TheMan
2004-11-07 16:18:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Open
Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary means"
Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a trigger to war.
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If there is
a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic, the IAEA or a
member state, the matter will return to the council for discussions as
required in paragraph 12."
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better understanding of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
So you feel that serious consequences are discussion at the U.N.
Interesting.
Evidence please that the U.N said that Iraq was not in compliance.

After all it is them deciding whether they are in compliance, not the USA
dipshit.

-TheMan-
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 01:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Open
Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary
means"
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a trigger to
war.
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If there
is
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic, the IAEA or
a
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
member state, the matter will return to the council for discussions as
required in paragraph 12."
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ? Or do you think you have a better
understanding
of
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
So you feel that serious consequences are discussion at the U.N.
Interesting.
Evidence please that the U.N said that Iraq was not in compliance.
This paragraph from Blixes report of March 8 2003. Complete report here

http://www.usresolve.org/blix-report-un-iraq-disarmament-08-march-2003.php

"It is obvious that, while the numerous initiatives, which are now taken by
the Iraqi side with a view to resolving some long-standing open disarmament
issues, can be seen as "active", or even "proactive", these initiatives
three to four months into the new resolution cannot be said to constitute
"immediate" cooperation."
Post by emmanuel
After all it is them deciding whether they are in compliance, not the USA
dipshit.
And who said it was, "dipshit"?

Don Wagner
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-07 09:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Don Wagner
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
It seems that it authorized all necessary measures to ensure Iraqui
compliance
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/682/26/PDF/N0268226.pdf?Open
Element
What do you think the "Serious consequences" they were talking about
were? A Pillow fight?
The traditional wording for war has always been "use all necessary means"
Res. 1441 has been adopted precisely because it was NOT a trigger to war.
Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all
necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2
August

1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to
restore

international peace and security in the area,



13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq
that

it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of
its

obligations;

http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/docs/united%20nations%20res%201441.htm
Post by emmanuel
Even your own ambassador at the UN, acknowledged it wasn't : "If there is
a further Iraqi breach, reported to the council by Unmovic, the IAEA or a
member state, the matter will return to the council for discussions as
required in paragraph 12."
its say that they will meet, but does not say that it has to meet before it
can act
Post by emmanuel
Can't you make the difference between "return to the council for
discussions" and "war" ?
I can read, and it make no mention of further permission needed.

don't tell lies


Or do you think you have a better understanding of
Post by emmanuel
UN resolutions than John Negroponte ?
A better understanding than you


remember you though that resolution 1464 give the French authority, your
knowledge the resolutions is not good
Harry Snape
2004-11-07 06:55:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
Can't you ?
Yup, one involves the US security council acting in the best interest of
the Ivory Coast, the other involves the Security Council acting in the
best interest of France's illegal exports to Iraq.
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 15:28:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Snape
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between a UN
sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000
civilians.
Can't you ?
Yup, one involves the US security council acting in the best interest of
the Ivory Coast, the other involves the Security Council acting in the
best interest of France's illegal exports to Iraq.
I imagine we'll have huge demonstrations in front of the French Embassy
when the "Intellectual" left see this. Sure we will

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3989765.stm

Don Wagner
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-07 09:42:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
yes it did
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp


resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been there from
before the resolution anyhow

your lying
Post by emmanuel
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000 civilians.
But thats not the case

resolution 1441 gave all member states authority to act
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp

resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been there from
before the resolution anyhow
Post by emmanuel
Can't you ?
emmanuel
2004-11-08 01:34:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
yes it did
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp
resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been there
from before the resolution anyhow
your lying
My lying ?
What does Res. 1464 should have to do with a 40 years old military
cooperation agreement signed by France and Ivory Coast, agreement that
binds the French army to support the Ivory Coast against foreign
aggression.
FYI, without a French intervention the rebels would have overrun President
Gbagbo's army in a few days. The French military presence in Ivory Coast
before resolution 1464 was perfectly legal and you can now go back to your
homework.
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Besides, I believe most people can see the difference between
a UN sonspored Peace-keeping mission to protect civilians
and
an unauthorized war based on false pretence killing 100 000
civilians.
But thats not the case
resolution 1441 gave all member states authority to act
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp
resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been there
from before the resolution anyhow
Post by emmanuel
Can't you ?
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-08 09:58:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with your
Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a peace-keeping
mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
yes it did
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp
resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been there
from before the resolution anyhow
your lying
My lying ?
yes
Post by emmanuel
What does Res. 1464 should have to do with a 40 years old military
cooperation agreement signed by France and Ivory Coast, agreement that
binds the French army to support the Ivory Coast against foreign
aggression.
here is what you said

**********
Post by emmanuel
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
*********


I caught you lying, and when cornered you told another lie to cover for your
first.

You are simply dishonest and not very bright
emmanuel
2004-11-08 14:01:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
yes it did
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp
resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been
there from before the resolution anyhow
your lying
My lying ?
yes
Post by emmanuel
What does Res. 1464 should have to do with a 40 years old military
cooperation agreement signed by France and Ivory Coast, agreement
that binds the French army to support the Ivory Coast against foreign
aggression.
here is what you said
**********
Post by emmanuel
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
*********
I caught you lying, and when cornered you told another lie to cover
for your first.
You are simply dishonest and not very bright
ok ... let summ up facts :

5 years after the independance, in 1965, France and Ivory Coast signed a
military cooperation agreement.
The French military presence in Ivory Coast before 2002 was part of this
agreement, hence, it was not illegal, didn't have to be authorized by the
UN, and was not an "invasion". Note that this agreement prevented a
bloodbath in Abidjan in 2002, and that since this agreement is still valid,
the French military presence in Ivory Coast doesn't even need UN
authorisation.

According to this agreement, French troops were only supposed to act in the
event of a foreign agression (as in 2002, since many rebels came from other
countries), but not in a civil war.
After the 2002 events, the UN gave to the French troops the mandate they
needed to maintain peace in civil war situation.

Note that nobody is contesting the French military presence in Ivory Coast,
not even the US administration or Gbagbo himself.
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-10 12:46:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by emmanuel
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Because you signed UN resolution 1464, but were too busy with
your Iraqi Wet Mass Dream to send troops in Africa for a
peace-keeping mission.
they did not go to Iraq with resolution 1441 so that not the reason
Because Resolution 1441 didn't authorize war.
yes it did
http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/focus/iraq/default.asp
resolution 1464 does not authorize French troops who have been
there from before the resolution anyhow
your lying
My lying ?
yes
Post by emmanuel
What does Res. 1464 should have to do with a 40 years old military
cooperation agreement signed by France and Ivory Coast, agreement
that binds the French army to support the Ivory Coast against foreign
aggression.
here is what you said
**********
Post by emmanuel
Since when was the French invasion sponsored by the U.N.?
Since the security council unanimously adopted resolution 1464.
And a peacekeeping operation is not an invasion.
*********
I caught you lying, and when cornered you told another lie to cover
for your first.
You are simply dishonest and not very bright
5 years after the independance, in 1965, France and Ivory Coast signed a
military cooperation agreement.
The French military presence in Ivory Coast before 2002 was part of this
agreement, hence, it was not illegal, didn't have to be authorized by the
UN, and was not an "invasion". Note that this agreement prevented a
bloodbath in Abidjan in 2002, and that since this agreement is still valid,
the French military presence in Ivory Coast doesn't even need UN
authorisation.
yet you said they had
Post by emmanuel
According to this agreement, French troops were only supposed to act in the
event of a foreign agression (as in 2002, since many rebels came from other
countries), but not in a civil war.
After the 2002 events, the UN gave to the French troops the mandate they
needed to maintain peace in civil war situation.
Evidence?
Post by emmanuel
Note that nobody is contesting the French military presence in Ivory Coast,
not even the US administration or Gbagbo himself.
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-07 13:41:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-07 15:26:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav

Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3989765.stm

Don Wagner
TheMan
2004-11-07 16:16:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.

If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.

And that boys and girls is the difference.

-TheMan-
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-07 22:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
-TheMan-
Thanks for the good post!
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-09 04:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?

Why is that?

Don Wagner
TheMan
2004-11-09 11:15:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Evidence please dickhead, and I want LINKS from reputable news sources.

Waiting EAGERLY for this one.

If you are wrong, I want to see a public apology from you to the French on
this newsgroup.

-TheMan-
Jeff
2004-11-09 16:55:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the
people
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia,
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with
Jaque
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets
were
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Evidence please dickhead, and I want LINKS from reputable news sources.
Waiting EAGERLY for this one.
If you are wrong, I want to see a public apology from you to the French on
this newsgroup.
-TheMan-
Yea, you owe those French people an apology. Aren't you aware of the danger
af taking out most of the air force of the super power Ivory Coast? It
wasn't just one or two helicopters but four, count them, four helicopters.
327 medals for bravery under fire were given to the French heroes.
Harry Snape
2004-11-09 20:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia,
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with
Jaque
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Evidence please dickhead, and I want LINKS from reputable news sources.
Waiting EAGERLY for this one.
If you are wrong, I want to see a public apology from you to the French on
this newsgroup.
-TheMan-
Or you could follow TheImbecile's lead, post a reference to a high
school website, then double count all the running totals.
You'd probably be able to get the number of Ivory Coast deaths into the
thousands on this one incident alone if you can find a site with hour by
hour figures.
Hü©k Hö§hïmötö
2004-11-09 23:57:40 UTC
Permalink
..........Iraq had real weapons! (And we know how brave the French are!)
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 01:31:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the
people
of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia,
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with
Jaque
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Evidence please dickhead, and I want LINKS from reputable news sources.
Waiting EAGERLY for this one.
Since you couldn't muster up enough firing neurons to follow the link the
first time
I posted it, we'll try it again slowly so fucking retards like you can
follow. Is
the BBC up to your fucking standards, dipshit?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3989765.stm
Post by Don Wagner
If you are wrong, I want to see a public apology from you to the French on
this newsgroup.
Don't hold your breath moron.

Don Wagner
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-09 22:04:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Don Wagner
Was it okay for the US to massacre 30 people at a wedding ceremony in Iraq?
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 01:21:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by TheMan
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
Did you see this? Where is your outrage? Where is your disgust with Jaque
Chirac?
The people that attacked the French peacekeepers with fighter jets were the
Ivory Coast government themselves.
If the French wanted, they could have overthrown the government and
installed their own puppet government U.S government style. Instead they
remain there.. as a U.N peacekeeping force not getting involved in politics.
And that boys and girls is the difference.
So according to you it's ok for the French to Massacre 30 or so Ivory
Coasatians huh?
Why is that?
Don Wagner
Was it okay for the US to massacre 30 people at a wedding ceremony in Iraq?
I asked fierst. Where's the outrage? You sure were heard from when the
"wedding" ceremony
got hit. You really don't give a shit about the casualties except they
enable you top bash
the U.S.

Don Wagner
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-07 22:31:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-09 04:06:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
The point is you don't seem the least concerned aboout the French
not being Peacekeepers, or Their supposed massacre of Ivory
Coast citizens. One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French

Don Wagner
TheMan
2004-11-09 11:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
The point is you don't seem the least concerned aboout the French
not being Peacekeepers, or Their supposed massacre of Ivory
Coast citizens. One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
The USA kills tens, if not hundreds of civilians every day in Iraq.

Why are you worried about the French blowing up a hangar full of planes? You
are making yourself look like a real dickhead.

-TheMan-
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-09 22:06:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
The point is you don't seem the least concerned aboout the French
not being Peacekeepers, or Their supposed massacre of Ivory
Coast citizens. One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
The USA kills tens, if not hundreds of civilians every day in Iraq.
Why are you worried about the French blowing up a hangar full of planes? You
are making yourself look like a real dickhead.
-TheMan-
I am sure dickheads wouldn't want to be associated with the likes of him.
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 01:36:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
The point is you don't seem the least concerned aboout the French
not being Peacekeepers, or Their supposed massacre of Ivory
Coast citizens. One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
The USA kills tens, if not hundreds of civilians every day in Iraq.
Why are you worried about the French blowing up a hangar full of planes? You
are making yourself look like a real dickhead.
Who was talking about planes shithead? I was talking about the Ivory
Coasters killed by the French
and how liberal retards like you don't give a fuck because it ain't the U.S.
doing it. You do however
know how to spew invective instead of doing elementary research.

Don Wagner
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-10 12:48:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
The point is you don't seem the least concerned aboout the French
not being Peacekeepers, or Their supposed massacre of Ivory
Coast citizens. One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
The USA kills tens, if not hundreds of civilians every day in Iraq.
do they?

Evidence please?
Post by Don Wagner
Why are you worried about the French blowing up a hangar full of planes? You
are making yourself look like a real dickhead.
So you say its ok for France to be in Ivory Coast, but not ok for the US to
be in Iraq?
Post by Don Wagner
-TheMan-
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-09 22:06:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
Post by Don Wagner
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
Don Wagner
Well, the US has already shown their propensity to cause mass deaths:
even when it is unarmed women and children.

So again what is your point?
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Don Wagner
2004-11-10 01:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge demonstations
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
Post by Don Wagner
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
Don Wagner
Well, the US has already shown their propensity to cause mass deaths: even
when it is unarmed women and children.
So again what is your point?
The point is how you don't really give a flying fuck about casualties except
that it gives
you an excuse to bash the U.S.

Don Wagner
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-11 13:38:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people of
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia, the
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
Post by Don Wagner
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
Don Wagner
even when it is unarmed women and children.
Have they, how when?
Post by Don Wagner
So again what is your point?
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bush is the AntiChrist!!
2004-11-13 00:47:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia,
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
Post by Don Wagner
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
Don Wagner
even when it is unarmed women and children.
Have they, how when?
Try watching the news, other than Fox News, the most illigetimate in
newscasting.
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mosley Jones III
2004-11-23 12:14:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Mosley Jones III
the
French
They are there, if you bother to read a newspaper, because the people
of
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
the country asked them to.
You don't see the US going to any African country, even in Liberia,
the
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
only other country besides Israel that likes us.
Yeah. That explains the bombing of their camp and the huge
demonstations
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Don Wagner
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
Post by Don Wagner
demanding they leav
The Iraqis demand that we leave to, so what's your point?
One can only imagine the hysteria you'd demonstrate
Post by Don Wagner
if it were the U.S. in there and not the French
Don Wagner
even when it is unarmed women and children.
Have they, how when?
Try watching the news, other than Fox News, the most illigetimate in
newscasting.
so you don't have any evidence?

Why would you believe what you don't have evidence off?
Post by Bush is the AntiChrist!!
--
The Best in Message Board Discussions
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
-----------------
Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
David Butler
2004-11-07 16:17:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Because the locals are savages who are slaughtering each other.
Sam
2004-11-07 23:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
No matter what, they just won't get it. They see only with one eye,
hear only with one ear, and think only with one neuron.

Sam
st
2004-11-08 01:25:43 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 07:01:00 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
There are no WMD's in Ivory Coast, so why are the French there?
Why are they sending moor troops?
Why aren't the left accusing them of stealing oil?
Why aren't the left demanding they leave?
Why aren't the left calling Chirac Hitler?
Why would be the case if they were Americans in Ivory Coast and not the the
French
peace·keep·ing
adj.
Of or relating to the preservation of peace, especially the
supervision by international forces of a truce between hostile
nations.


--
"It's too late
to be late again
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...