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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (149949)	11/11/2002 12:42:30 PM
From: H James Morris	Respond to of 164684

What does that have to do with SONUS??

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (149949)	11/11/2002 12:52:57 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Will - I don't know what you are smoking but as far as I can see there is nothing of the sort in UN Resolution 687, as adopted by the Security Council at its 2981st meeting on 3 April 1991. You say: >>In 1991, the world declared (UN Res 687) that Iraq wouldn't be sovereign again until they disarmed, and Iraq agreed to comply. And I give you excerpts from the UN Resolution 687: --------------------------------------------------- The Security Council, Recalling its resolutions 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990, 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 662 (1990) of 9 August 1990, 664 (1990) of 18 August 1990, 665 (1990) of 25 August 1990, 666 (1990) of 13 September 1990, 667 (1990) of 16 September 1990, 669 (1990) of 24 September 1990, 670 (1990) of 25 September 1990, 674 (1990) of 29 October 1990, 677 (1990) of 28 November 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990 and 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, Welcoming the restoration to Kuwait of its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and the return of its legitimate Government, Affirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Kuwait and Iraq, and noting the intention expressed by the Member States cooperating with Kuwait under paragraph 2 of resolution 678 (1990) to bring their military presence in Iraq to an end as soon as possible consistent with paragraph 8 of resolution 686 (1991), Noting that Iraq and Kuwait, as independent sovereign States, signed at Baghdad on 4 October 1963 "Agreed Minutes Between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition and Related Matters", thereby recognizing formally the boundary between Iraq and Kuwait and the allocation of islands... A.2. 2. Demands that Iraq and Kuwait respect the inviolability of the international boundary and the allocation of islands set out in the "Agreed Minutes Between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition and Related Matters", signed by them in the exercise of their sovereignty at Baghdad on 4 October 1963 and registered with the United Nations and published by the United Nations in document 7063, United Nations, Treaty Series, 1964 ---------------------------------------------------- clw.org -------------------------------------------------- Anyway, I do not see anything in the UN Resolution 687 that says anything like "In 1991, the world declared (UN Res 687) that Iraq wouldn't be sovereign again until they disarmed, and Iraq agreed to comply.", as you have put it. Iraq has agreed to that as a sovereign state. Its sovereignty was NOT suspended pending any conditions. You have also said: in this era of terrorist-harboring states, sovereignty isn't what it used to be. Excuse me, but are you under the impression that terrorism was born on 11 September 2001? There were always states harboring terrorism, and, in case you are not aware that subjects in the mirror can be deeper than they appear, one guy's terrorist can also be another's freedom fighter. What do you mean "sovereignty is not what it used to be"? Are you under the (very mistaken) impression that now the US can do as it wishes because they have been attacked once and can now strike back in whichever direction they choose to fight the "evildoers"? As far as international law and international community is concerned, sovereignty is exactly what it used to be, for your information.