I disagree with you on the "how" aspect. I am saying that we should not be doing it the way Bush and Co. did it, overriding world opinion etc.
Since when does France, Germany, and Russia represent world opinion?
And since when do we refuse to enforce the law merely because it's "unpopular"?
Is the UN supposed to stand for anything other than flowery rhetoric?
Binding UN resolutions require all UN members to enforce them, economically and militarily, if possible, to thwart agression and maintain stability.
Iraq aggressed and invaded Kuwait. After being defeated, it agreed to disarm and cooperate with inspectors, only to be judged in material breach by the UNSC..
You didn't seem to have any problem with showing Saddam "our way" when it came to ousting his forces from Kuwait..
But apparently you believe he should have "his way", by way of using France as a spoiler in the UNSC?
There simply was no other way Chinu, short of returning to flawed inspections with an uncooperative and deceitful Baathist regime. Chirac simply was not going to permit it, because he was bent upon protecting the interests of French oil companies supporting the status quo.
Again... you seem to believe that Chirac, the man who sold Saddam his nuclear reactors, was right, and Bush was wrong.. I really suggest that maybe you might find more kindred spirits in France.. Might be worth spending more time there.. Maybe even retire there..
Hawk |
