Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (44152)	9/15/2002 3:05:12 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) of 281500

a strike on Iraq without UN backing is an act of war from us to them A strike on Iraq is an act of war regardless of whether the UN backs it or not. we would be the first strike perpetrator We are not initiating force, we are finishing the job that Iraq started in 1991, pursuant to multiple UN resolutions, which can be found here: whitehouse.gov There is ample historic precedent. Here's one example: after WWI, Germany (which lost) promised to pay reparations to France (which won). When Germany tried to repudiate its obligations, France invaded the Ruhr Valley and seized German factories and applied sales proceeds towards Germany's reparation debt. This is directly analogous to the situation at hand. Iraq invaded Kuwait. The UN authorized the use of force in order to (1) liberate Kuwait and (2) achieve peace in the region. In order to effectuate (2) (peace in the region) the UN ordered Iraq to get rid of its weapons of mass destruction. Iraq remains defiantly non-compliant with UN resolutions. I know you favor multilateralism and the UN, so I am sure that you support compliance with UN resolutions, even if it requires the use of deadly force.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next