Ted,
Now big man genius, you show me where the UN was opposed to the NATO airstrikes? Point out to me the bypassing of the UN?
Let me do this slowly. There are 3 possible actions the UN Security Council can do as far as military action is concerned:
1. Endorse
2. No action
3. Condemn
#1. and #3. yield in a resolution, and you can look them up on the web site I posted. All veto holding members must support or abstain, and majority is needed for resolution to pass. On Yugoslavia, since 3 of the 5 veto holding members were for the bombing of Yugoslavia, 2 were against, nothing was agreed to, so result #2 happened - no action.
With UN approval unachievable, Clinton administration bypassed UN and proceeded through NATO.
Right now, on Iraq, the US is now seeking #1. - Endorsement of use of force, meaning resolution in the Security Council endorsing use of force. This is someting the US failed to get on Yugoslavia. If the US/Britain succeed, all is fine with the UN. If the endorsement is not achieved, the US can still claim some of the older resolution applies, but practically, as far as the UN is concerned attack on Iraq would be as illegal as attack on Yugoslavia.
Anyway, what I am curious about is if you really are not getting this, or if you are just pretending that you are not getting this.
Your misunderstanding of the timeline is remarkable as in:
The UN was right in there from the beginning, calling for an immediate cease fire on the part of the Serb forces in Sept, 1998. NATO airstrikes began in the next month when the Serbs ignored the UN request for a cease fire.
The UN resolution said: "You guys (Serbs and KLA, stop fighting amongst yourself". It did not say: "The US, bomb Yugoslavia".
In "NATO authrizes", only UN can authorize, in the UN centric world. NATO has no authority to authorize something like this.
Another indication that you have no clue is when you say "NATO air strikes began" a month after this "NATO authorization". This did not happen. No airstrikes began. It was only verbal a threat.
In "NATO airstrikes resume", again, a misunderstanding on your part. Nothing resumed, since nothing started. It was the real start of the war - without the UN endorsement.
Anyway, at least now, you are finally starting to put some effort into learning what really happened. That's a start.
You could have taken my word for it, or you could have asked for clarification, or studied the issues on your own. You would have avoided all the embarrassment.
Af far as your sentence here:
you show me where the UN was opposed to the NATO airstrikes?
This would be #3, condemn, and this can never happen to the US, UK, France, Russia or China, since they would veto the resolution. So if there is something (that could be condemned by the UN) happens with these 5 countries, the result is #2 - no action, which is what happened on Kosovo. Witness no action on Kosovo prior to March 1999 start of the air strikes.
Joe |
