SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: marcos who wrote (103095)6/27/2003 12:21:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (4) of 281500
 
Oh boy, i could really turn this one around, Hawk .... very juicy line that ... but, on to something touching on recent middle east conquest et al -

Only if you're going to be deliberately disingenuous.

The bottom line is:

1.) Saddam invaded Kuwait.

2.) The UN passed binding resolutions authorizing "all necessary means" to restore stability and international peace. That was interpreted as the military use of force.

3.) Saddam was evicted and provided the opportunity to avoid regime change in exchange for elimination of his WMDs and all existing technology. An inspection process is set up wherein he will reveal ALL OF HIS WMDS to them so they can be accounted for and destroyed.

4.) Saddam violates that agreement and cease-fire, as well as every subsequent UNSC binding resolution, yet no one is willing to force his compliance. No one wants to pay the cost or "rock the boat".

5.) 9/11, the world changed and the US finally awakened to the situation in the Mid-East and decided it could no longer be ignored.

Iraq was a lingering problem that also could no longer be ignored. Especially if a politically effective UN was to be available to help contain terrorism around the world.

Pretty simple marcos.. At it's foundation... But you all can get lost in the shades of grey and political bias if you want... All I have to do is ask you why the UN should be willing to enforce one binding resolution (Desert Storm) against Iraq, but not any of the others.

All I have to do is ask you why the UN even exists, if all it can do is issue binding resolutions that it never bothers to enforce.

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News