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: Maurice Winn who wrote (131321)	5/4/2004 9:25:12 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

You are feeling the pressure of Noblesse Oblige but with an element of hubris. A more modest USA wouldn't have presumed that being the world's only superpower was sufficient qualification to rule the world and get stuck into Iraq without full-on support from the UN. Possibly.. But most of it is just being blinded by millions of exposed, cranium stuffed, buttocks around the world... And if one pardons the analogy, as I certainly do not consider myself anywhere nearly worthy of comparison, I feel a bit like Winston Churchill during his wilderness years, when people ignored his warnings about Hitler and the Nazi movement. Ease the burden Hawk. A problem shared is a problem halved, but in this case it would be a problem much less than halved. Give the UN a big push along. I thought that was what we were attempting to do back in 2002?? I mean come on.. we had a 15-0 unanimous vote on 1441, threatening severe consequences if theyfailed to come into compliance within 90 days. And even when the "Tre Amis", France, Germany, and Russia, demanded another UN resolution before launching military operations against Iraq, they found themselves outvoted 9-6 on the decision to go to war.. So France and Russia relied upon their permanent veto authority, rather than merely abstaining... This was a binding UNSC resolution vote, Maurice.. A vote to uphold and enforce 17 different binding resolutions demanding that Iraq comply with its cease fire and disarmament obligations. And it was defeated by two nations who, we find out, were heavily involved in serious conflicts of interest with Iraq. So I really wish people like yourself (whom I have some respect for) would quit buying this delusion that the UN was somehow going to get involved in taking military actions against Iraq. The only ones who could uphold and enforce those resolutions were those who actually were willing to defy the corrupt intransigence of France and Russia. It's a lie to ever believe that France and Russia were going to DIRECTLY sanction military attacks against Iraq.. The worst they would permit themselves to be "coerced" into was to blather on in endless debate and diatribes against Saddam. Hawk