I forgot to thank you for starting a new thread.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
Yes, the US can just say, "No fair, they are breaking the rules!" and then invade. We were a party to the ceasefire agreement as well. If it has been voided through the actions of one party, then the other party is no longer responsible to the terms.
|
If the UN rules it so, yes. They didn't. We didn't follow the procedures of the security council that we are a part of. We tried to get the UN to support us, but they didn't. The US had the right to say, "They broke the rules, so we need to do something", and Poewll said as much to the security council....right before they voted no.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
This is true, but from a legal perspective it is irrelevent.
|
It suggests the use of misinformation to characterize Iraq as a threat so that they could try to squeak through on the second UN Charter situation, the imminent threat thing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
No, we interpreted prior resolutions as giving us the right to legally invade Iraq.
|
That's not how resolutions work. Resolutions are put in place, and if tyhey are broken, then the security council determines what response is appropriate. They didn't, and the US doesn't have the power to legally bypass the security council unless we are threatened.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
But there was no termination of hostilities, only a ceasefire. So both conditions still existed in 2003.
|
Exactly, so the UN security council was trying to figure out what action was the best. Invasion was not the decision of the council, only a minority of it's members.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
It's not a strawman, will. This administration has done a lot of shitty things, Hell, I'll even go so far as to agree with Carter. But they are not even in the same ballpark as the Nazis, not even close. To suggest they are is to trivialize the evil of the third riech.
|
Hitler didn't have to cheat to win. Not seeing the similarities, though obviously at different levels, doesn't make sense to me. No, no genocide (outside of Darfur and Iraq) is going on, but habeas corpus is gone, the Patriot act reads like an updated version of the Enabling Act, and we're acting unilaterally placing or military where it doesn't belong. No, we're not Nazi Germany, but we're closer to it now than we were 10 years ago.