Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (149568)	8/13/2002 2:55:23 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580363

You mean the UN weapons inspectors, don't you? It is done under a UN mandate, and presumably, the reinstallation of weapons inspectors would be done as part of a UN mandate, NOT as the United States doing it alone. That said, if the UN is uncooperative, then our position must supersede that of the UN. Ten years ago, things were different. We were operating under UN authority in defense of another nation. Today, our own interests are clearly at stake. We will do what we must to protect those interests, with or without the UN. I have no problem with the UN as an entity but there is a time and place for it. In the Gulf War, the UN played an important role. But it would be foolish to suggest that because the UN provided the mandate in the Gulf War, the United States is not allowed to protect its interest in subsequent years.