[steppenwolf]

i heard on gcn radio today he said mexico doesnt need permission to send trroops to usa

could it be true?

[Ciberblade]

With so little information....I suppose it is true, their President may not need permission to send troops to the USA...but then, our President does not need permission to send our troops to send their troops back (in whatever convenient method you can derive)

[steppenwolf]

what?youre a republican? what do you think of the mexican troops here? i think it sucks
we dont need troops

[Ciberblade]

Troops for what purpose? You have not stated what this is all about -- perhaps if you did, I could respond with a bit more specifics

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Ciberblade

Troops for what purpose? You have not stated what this is all about -- perhaps if you did, I could respond with a bit more specifics

I suggest that they are marched to the border, ordered to do a 180 and told to shoot to kill anything attempting to cross the border. That should be fun to watch.

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

I suggest that they are marched to the border, ordered to do a 180 and told to shoot to kill anything attempting to cross the border. That should be fun to watch.

Bush would offer himself as a human shield!!!. Now that would be funny!! >f

[brushmaster1]

Well, Bush obviously didn't need permission to send troops to Iraq... I suppose the same philosophy would work for Fox.

[Ciberblade]

Originally Posted by brushmaster1

Well, Bush obviously didn't need permission to send troops to Iraq... I suppose the same philosophy would work for Fox.

Eh? Bush had permission to send troops into Iraq....authorized by Congress and the U.N.

[teengeekgrrl]

Any Canadian blood Ciber?

[poochee]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

I suggest that they are marched to the border, ordered to do a 180 and told to shoot to kill anything attempting to cross the border. That should be fun to watch.

Especially if he leads them!

[brushmaster1]

Originally Posted by ciberblade

Eh? Bush had permission to send troops into Iraq....authorized by Congress and the U.N.

He didn't have permission from Iraq, any more than Fox has permission from the U.S.

[Ciberblade]

Originally Posted by brushmaster1

He didn't have permission from Iraq, any more than Fox has permission from the U.S.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. In matters of war, is it expected that the country being declared war on must accept before a war can take place?

Like I said...Fox can send his men...and we can send ours to send his back -- we'll even provide proper postage

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by Ciberblade

Eh? Bush had permission to send troops into Iraq....authorized by Congress and the U.N.

The UN??? I'm fairly sure they were dead against unillateral action by the US and UK. (and 1441 doesn't count.)

[alex_holker]

Originally Posted by brushmaster1

Well, Bush obviously didn't need permission to send troops to Iraq... I suppose the same philosophy would work for Fox.

Sure, except for this philosophy to work, you have to be able to win. Last I heard, Mexico wasn't exactly the world's greatest military power.

[Ciberblade]

Originally Posted by ChrisJones

The UN??? I'm fairly sure they were dead against unillateral action by the US and UK. (and 1441 doesn't count.)

Last time I check only two nations (France and Germany) were dead against it -- and now we know why. The US and UK were not the only countries involved

AND....why should 1441 not count? After all, it did outline use of force as a consequence to its provisions.