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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (14770)	3/2/2003 4:45:48 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

Has the U.S. followed ALL relevant International Laws and Treaties that it has signed...? War should be THE LAST RESORT after all other reasonable alternatives have been exhausted...It's clear we ARE NOT there yet...Additionally, there IS NOT broad support for a 'pre-emptive strike' on Iraq...Why are we having so much trouble getting our Allies to get on board with this rush to war...? Bush's father spent over 6 months recruiting allies and partners for the Gulf War -- there was BROAD SUPPORT around the world when we did go in...That's not the case now.

To: AK2004 who wrote (14770)	3/2/2003 4:56:00 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

>>guided by principles and norms of international law<< Kindly show us where in international law one is allowed to make a preemptive, unprovoked strike. Note the difference between Bush jr. and sr. Daddy Bush was able to secure a coalition because Iraq had clearly invaded its neighbor Kuwait. Today Iraq isn't capable of invading even its northern provinces where the Kurds live (and getting away with it). No, the present preemptive stance is not justified in international law. The rift this has caused with countries that used to be our allies is an indication of how bad this administration is on diplomacy. They can't get anything right, and as a last resort, they blame everything on terrorism, regardless of whether there's any evidence to back up their assertions. Of course, they depend on getting support from people who will blindly support anything that smacks of military macho. And so far they haven't been disappointed. Art