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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neocon who wrote (61007)10/4/2002 11:22:22 AM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Even according to the UN charter, every nation retains an absolute right to
self-defense. If we go into Iraq, it will be because we deem it a matter of vital
concern to our national interests.


That's a mighty broad definition of self defense. I don't think it's one the UN would accept. And I don't think it's one we would accept if, say, Pakistan used self-defense as an excuse to drop a nuke on New Delhi.



To: Neocon who wrote (61007)10/4/2002 3:04:24 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
If this is vital, we can deem anything vital, and we can invade just about anyone. Which of course we could do. We could become that kind of country. I would simply prefer that we do not.



To: Neocon who wrote (61007)10/5/2002 10:55:07 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
Actually, we practically have been hired by the world to be its police force. When NATO or the UN need someone to do heavy lifting, they call in the United States.

Not just that but when there is no police force or government vigilante justice is somewhat justified. Since there is no world police force we have to look out for out own interests with our own force.

Tim