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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (17681)	6/16/2005 7:54:55 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

"While I am by no means an expert [or even close to being a novice] in international law .." Yet you go on and decide you can judge a violation of int'l law anyway. You took the bait! I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Ever heard the phrase, "Ignorance is no excuse for the law." Do you have a problem reading and/or understanding Article VI of the US Constitution? Are the words in it too big for you? "Of course recognizing that Iraq had no reasonable chance of hitting US aircraft..." You're just rehashing the poor shot argument here. Not really. I was giving you a hint, but you weren't bright enough to take it. You think that the US military was too stupid [or irresponsible] to have their pilots fly below the range of Iraq's anti-aircraft guns? "So by justifying the invasion of Iraq as you have.." The invasion wasn't justified on solely one issue - just check out the congressional resolutions. Congress also passed budget resolutions that gave the cotton industry subsidies. They were ruled in violation of international law. There have been quite a few laws that Congress passes that have been ruled unconstitutional. But you don't even understand clearly what you said. The crux of your intial argument wasn't the congressional resolutions it was that the US is a sovereign country and didn't need UN approval. That was a failed argument. Then you tried the self defense justification for the conduct of a legal war. That failed. jttmab