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 (132299)	5/9/2004 2:33:45 AM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Are these standards used uniformly? Has Israel ignored any UN resolutions? Has US ignored any UN resolutions? >I believe in the UN as a critical organization for dealing with conflict resolution. But I also believe that when it issues Chapter VII, especially by a 15-0 unanimous decision, there IS AN OBLIGATION for members of the UNSC to back that decision's implementation, even if it requires the use of force.>

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (132299)	5/9/2004 7:57:36 AM
From: h0db	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I believe in the UN as a critical organization for dealing with conflict resolution. But I also believe that when it issues Chapter VII, especially by a 15-0 unanimous decision, there IS AN OBLIGATION for members of the UNSC to back that decision's implementation, even if it requires the use of force. Oh come on, you seem like a bright person. Do you know any deliberative body that behaves that way? And the issue before the Security Council was not whether Iraq was in material breech. The issue was whether Iraq posed an imminent threat. Gaining support of the UNSC requires adroit diplomacy and the skillful use of US power. Under Bush, the US does none of that. I think that the US could have won an explicit use of force resolution on the basis of the resolutions that Saddam was already violating. We never tried, because it would have taken time. The UN phase of Bushes road to war ultimately was a side show because he was going to war no matter what the UN voted, and no matter what the evidence showed. He had made that decision by April 2002. And your harping on the UN is similarly hypocritical. The last thing that conservatives want is an effective UN, unless it is entirely doing their bidding.