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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edscharp who wrote (12864)	4/13/2003 2:19:00 AM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

"Every State has the duty to ensure that conditions prevailing in its territory do not menace international peace and order." The neocon fearmongering over WMD to create bogus justification for an invasion of Iraq while there was a clear lack of threat to the US from Iraq would definitely qualify as a condition in US territory which not only menaced international peace and order but created war and disorder. (I know....you're gonna try to tell me saddam was geared up to invade the US, take over and use WMDs doing it)

To: Edscharp who wrote (12864)	4/13/2003 10:18:43 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

You could have used it when Iraq invaded Kuwait. It would be difficult to use it, in any meaningful sense, when a country appears to be just sitting there. We have no credible evidence Iraq was menacing anyone- although we DO have credible evidence that a lot of other countries are menacing not only their neighbors, but are sponsoring terrorism. Oddly we did not try to go after those countries. You also should observe that there is no language as to what one does if the duty is breached. The US does not have a mandate to go around correcting every country it thinks is deficient in the duty department. It COULD do that, of coruse, because it is powerful, but hate accrues to a country that uses its power like that. Because there are international duties, an international body should enforce them (imo). We ignored the international body which was available and went our own way. The consequences which will attend this invasion will all be laid at our door. Since you can never know what the consequences will be, that was a great risk to take. If we succeed we get the minimal payback of rebuilding a country that will probably not remain grateful to us. If we fail the risks are much more spectacular. On balance I see the risks we have taken on as far greater than any rewards.