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 (175967)	11/27/2005 1:49:01 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So you are trying to argue that the war, which the UN security council obviously did not agree with, was somehow "for" the UN, or under it's auspices. That's quite interesting. It strikes me as an utterly mad idea, but it's interesting. Needless to say, I don't agree with you- and I think the Iraq war was probably a violation of international law, and will be seen as such in the future. Since I know as much about the UN, the resolutions, and the time line for Iraqi actions as you seem to, what we have here is not a disagreement on facts, but a disagreement about where the facts lead. That will not be resolved- ever. You clearly envision a different international order than I do, and are willing to let the US spend considerably more capital achieving your vision than I am. End of story.