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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (17899)	9/29/2004 6:20:49 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Wrong. The poll you posted shows that 54% favored invasion, even without UN passage of a "final" (or should I say "final and we mean it this time, really") resolution. Of course, you'll try to argue that the US actually never brought such a final final resolution to a vote and claim only 47% were OK with invasion on that basis, but you'd only be picking nits. The reality of the situation was that the US tried to bring a final resolution to a vote, but Jacque Chiraq's France indicated that it would veto ANY new resolution that authorized force under ANY circumstances. And had the US and Britain allowed the vote to occur, in case you missed it at the time, there was a lawsuit waiting to be heard by British courts arguing that British participation after the resolution was vetoed would be illegal under British law. If nothing else, that would likely have delayed action by months, if not longer. In other words, the US, UK and, in fact, the entire UN were being held hostage to Chiraq's attempt to protect his oil-for-food-bribing friend Saddam Hussein. Sorry, Mark, but the reality is that, by your own proof, 54% of Americans supported the invasion, even without UN approval.