Tbh, the USA are the biggest opponents to peace in the world.

Okay I retract my statement full sanctions and economic blockades for both Iran and Israel. These naughty countries need to learn that supporting terrorism is bad.

Well I'm not willing to gamble with the lives of innocent civilians. Israel has never denied funding terrorists so it is probably safe to assume they are. They didn't really prove Iraq was building WMDs that didn't stop us. It cannot be proven Iran is building WMDs that doesn't stop governments saying they should invade anyway just in case. There was no evidence provided before we invaded Afghanistan. So really evidence is irrelevant.

That doesn't make any sense. I can name at least 10 UN member states that are sovereign and 'democratic' (like Israel) which are oppressive. Israel is certainly one of them, in fact Israel is more of a flawed democracy that purports to be fully democratic when it really isn't, similar to countries like Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Sri Lanka, India, South Africa and quite a few others. You are severely in denial if you think Palestine is subject to one of the least oppressive occupying powers in history.

I agree with this part. As a ethnic Chinese person I can see that the number of the attacks against Chinese living in the west is large and increasing. Its unfortunate as well that the people who often have to suffer the most sinophobic insults, attacks etc are those ethnic Chinese who were born and raised here.

Remember the story about that little girl being run over in China last year? I had people on the street spit at me and call me "baby killer".

Before the invasion of Afghanistan the Taliban demanded evidence that Bin Laden was responsible. The US refused to give them evidence and invaded instead. We had no evidence at least we have never made this evidence public anyway.

I was merely responding to your poorly informed response. Most of what you're saying now is completely irrelevant to what we were discussing. A little ironic no?

Learn to be succinct. You don't win debates by posting a load of irrelevant tosh.

'On 5 October 2001, the Taliban offered to try Bin Laden in an Afghan court, so long as the United States provided what it called "solid evidence" of his guilt, but the U.S. would not hand over its evidence to the Taliban.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001–present)

Wikipedia is always well sourced and I am yet to find any inaccuracies. It is highly unlikely such a high profile event would be incorrect on the largest encyclopaedia in the world.

My whole argument is that evidence is irrelevant you can act without evidence in specific circumstances.

It does reek of human catastrophe, but it will be Iran's fault I'm afraid.

An invasion was probably the incorrect move because it is unlikely that they were anywhere near getting nukes. Economic sanctions and a blockade would have been fine to pressure Iraq into democracy.

Saddam would never have obtained nuclear weapons with an economic blockade, he would never be able to got hold of the correct materials.