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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (170789)	6/22/2006 11:39:03 PM
From: kumar	Respond to of 793895

Discussing WMD/not in Iraq at this stage, is a futile excercise in what can be termed "mental masturbation".....

To: D. Long who wrote (170789)	6/23/2006 10:58:44 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793895

No, I really haven't forgotten. In order to persuade the American people and the United States Senate to support a pre-emptive war against a country which wasn't even thinking about attacking us first, the justification was that Saddam, a state sponsor of terrorism but NOT Islamist terrorism, either had or was too close to having WMD that he could pass on to Islamist terrorists who would be eager to use them against us, say, e.g., nuking DC or putting Sarin in the NY subway system, and the potential consequences of that were too dire to wait, so we had to strike first. It was existential. The justification was that Iraq was in material breach of UN resolutions because it was still pursuing nuclear, chemical and biological warfare programs, which turned out to be incorrect. You're studying law, next time you're in the law library take a peek at some books on the laws of war. It's a violation of the laws of war to attack another country that's just sitting there, not even thinking about attacking your country first. Falls under the category of "unjust war". Nothing other than existential war on behalf of ourselves or others can support a first strike. If the other country had already been the aggressor against another country, then a different set of rules apply. There were lots of good reasons for wishing Saddam dead or gone, but none of them within the laws of war. And we are, of course, a nation of laws. "Rules not men" as the saying goes.