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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: XBrit who wrote (66855)	1/19/2003 12:27:21 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

It appears to me that if you truly believe that there is no justification for war with Iraq, it doesn't really matter whether the UN endorses it or not. How would UN endorsement justify war with Iraq if it were otherwise not justified?

To: XBrit who wrote (66855)	1/19/2003 12:35:21 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I can only speak for myself. Personally, I believe that a unilateral, unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq by the U.S. would irreparably damage this country's moral authority and respect in the world, and over time cause more violence and death than it can prevent... As far as definite policies on Iraq, I support either: (a) continuation of the existing policies of containment and aggressive inspections, or (b) regime change by force following a resolution of the UN Security Council. Thanks for the explanation. Leaving aside the point that inspections are only an option because of Bush's willingness to unilaterally invade, I notice that you are for the war if the US gets a UNSC vote. Even though a UNSC vote, I presume, would not make a US attack any more "provoked". According to Gallup, you have a lot of company. I don't understand where the UN gets all this popular air of legitimacy. Libya is now head of the UN Human Rights Commission, for heaven's sake. Syria is on the UNSC. How is our foreign policy - already approved by our representatives in Congress - made more legitimate by having Syria vote for it? Will someone answer me that? And could you explain why you marched in an anti-war protest if you're not dead-set against the war? BTW, my prediction is that Bush will get his second UNSC vote when he does his promised consultation with the UNSC - precisely because he doesn't need the vote; he is ready to go without them.