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: Hawkmoon who wrote (118294)	11/3/2003 1:47:39 PM
From: GST	Respond to of 281500

You are describing the history of the coalition-building taken by Bush 1 versus the unilateral attack initiated by Bush 2. But in neither case was there any confusion as to intent of UNSC resolutions. Under Bush 1, the intent was to draw a UN line in the sand and thereafter take military action. Under Bush 2, the intent was to invade with or without the UN, and the UN never signed on to that mission. 1441 did only one thing -- authorize renewed inspections. A second resolution authorizing force was never agreed to or passed at the UNSC. The US did what Cheney had been saying it would do following 9/11 -- unilaterally invade Iraq. No UNSC resolution authorized the US to invade Iraq. You seem intent on pretending otherwise -- I am not interested in allowing this continued pretense to stand. We are now paying the price in the flesh and blood of our children as a direct consequence of taking the decision to conduct an invasion without legitimacy.