This week on Vanguard: Sri Lanka: Notes from a War on Terror

i am surprised to see that current/vanguard is riding the same dick now days as the rest of the media

so you just dont want to do anything? Typical liberal

I agree with him, it's like a "post it" you can stick it everywhere >_> ...

partially right, it is not not a war that can ever be won, as it is fighting against fundamentalist ideals... so, no you cannot "defeat" terrorism, as terrorism is generally directed at an idea: that being that the U.S. can illegally (in violation of the U.N.) exert its influence on the middle east to the benefit of one religious group and the detriment of another and invade sovereign nations without declaring war. Until that ends, and only a generation thereafter, will the current form of "terrorism" cease to exist.

Clay, sorry that you are misinformed. First, you are debating me on a point that I did not bring up. But since you mentioned it, it is easily settled as it is not in debate. Authorizing the use of military force and a formal declaration of war are not the same thing. The U.S. has not formally declared war since WWII. Since you like to google, simply type "did the U.S. declare war on Iraq", and you will be able to see the distinction.

However, what I was referring to is the "Bush Doctrine" or that of pre-emptive war, which is in violation of U.N. Charter. Although this claim does leave room for debate, the language of the charter is clear.

Article 2 States ""All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered."

Article 41 provides for the implementation of peaceful sanctions of countries as a first step towards remedying international disputes. Article 42 states that should the peaceful sanctions provided for by Article 41 be "inadequate or proven to be inadequate", the Security Council may authorize the use of military force. Since no Security Council Resolution authorized the use of force against Iraq, article 42 cannot be used to give legitimacy to the war.

Additionally, our own Constitution states that "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land". Therefore these actions without a security council resolution leave the U.S. in violation of the U.N. Charter. The only reason that the U.S. is not being sanctioned for this is that the U.S. in essence is the U.N. as our military expenditures dwarf the rest of the world, and in international politics, might makes right.

Before you go jumping down peoples throats, you should make sure that you have adequately informed yourself.

Earth to DMass

Walmart and crack have created more American 3rd world communities than the UN ever will.

she said "how do you defeat terrorism" if she was smart enough she wouldnt even ask that question, but maybe shes just reading a script that was given to her

My first sentence sums it up "President George Bush actually went to Congress got Congress's approval for the use of Military Force, which is a type of war declaration."
I cant help but notice the word "type" in there, its TYPE of war, so that mean its not really, just a-like, as something, that at the end of the day is not the same thing as the original, or as it should be.
p.s. we are in an illegal war

NEXTTTTTTTTTT

&Clay you are so right about the UN, thats exactly what they are doing and thats exactly what Bush and co. accomplished, they fucked america and that is exactly what you are supporting. think.

Your link glorifies the LTTE, ignoring their own human rights violations, use of child soldiers, suicide bomb attacks against Sri Lankan civilians, assassination of India's prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, murder of moderate Tamil politicians who tried to find a peaceful solution, ethnic cleansing of their own territories, etc. The LTTE earned their money from weapons, drugs, and human trafficking. Not to mention the map of Tamil Eelam that keeps popping up is only the land the LTTE claimed as their own, they never actually controlled that much of Sri Lanka.

Absolutely, the Sri Lankan government is facing a human rights disaster. I am by no means saying that the Sri Lankan government is innocent. but the chances that they will face any international charges are slim to none. No other country has been able to defeat a terrorist insurgency. America is fighting terrorist insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq, so they cannot possibly take action against a country that has finally succeeded. This war was a losing battle for the LTTE for years, it is time that everyone takes steps toward peace instead of glorifying a brutal terrorist organization that is hopefully gone for good.

How does it glorify the LTTE when the documentary points out the violations by the Sri Lankan government? Seems like pointing out the truth equates to glorifying LTTE. Incase your didn't watch the whole documentary the lady Nirmala points out what she thought and why she didn't like the LTTE.