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 : New FADG.

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1050)5/26/2007 8:32:48 PM
From: HawkmoonRead Replies (1) of 4152
 
Cut the crap.

As thick and heavy as you're laying it on, sounds like I'll need a chainsaw.

UNSC 1441 directly cited UNSC 678, stipulating that "all necessary means" were authorized to restore peace and stability to the region.

But for 13 years following the cease fire accord, there was neither peace, NOR stability, as Saddam continued to threaten his neighbors (including Kuwait again), brutalized his own population.

And unbeknownst to us AT THAT TIME, Saddam had effectively declared war upon the US:

Message 23572227

And btw.. those documents ARE genuine.

But let's get pack to the point.. For the sake of the debate, let's say I agree that the overthrow of Saddam was not authorized by the UN in 2003... (which I don't agree with).. How can you justify the UNSC authorizing Coalition forces remaining in Iraq AFTER Saddam was overthrown?

casi.org.uk

UNSC 1483 recognized the UK and US as occupying power in May, 2003. We WERE occupiers at THAT time, under UN authority.

But in June, 2004, the UNSC passed UNSC 1546, stating that it was "looking forward" to the end of occupation when the interim government transferred power to the elected Iraqi government:

daccessdds.un.org

That power WAS transferred and the occupation halted and became an authorized UN assistance mission.

And this was followed up by UNSC 1637 that authorizes multi-national forces to remain in Iraq with consent of the Iraqi government and/or the UNSC:

un.org

This authorization was extended until Dec, 2007 via UNSC 1723.

And please note, as your apparently reading this for the first time, that UNSC 1546 STRESSES the importance of consent by the Iraqi government for the continued presence of multi-national forces in Iraq. So far as I know, this consent by the Iraqi government has not been withdrawn, nor have they asked us to leave.

Sorry you didn't get memo WR.. but the OCCUPATION ENDED when the interim government transferred power to the elected government.

Hope this adds a bit of factual "solvent" that you can use to cut through that load of crap you've created in your own mind.

But dare I ask if facts actually mean anything to you?

I used to think you were willing to consider the facts.. But I'm seriously reconsidering my assessment..

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