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: jttmab who wrote (195776)	8/7/2006 5:06:05 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

True, which was why the French forced several changes to the draft resolution to make sure that 1441 didn't grant authorization to use force and another vote of the security council would be necessary. Wrong. UNSC 678 was cited in UNSC 1441. And UNSC 678 authorized the use of "ALL NECESSARY MEANS". Again.. the UN has NEVER specifically called for military forces to engage in war against another state. All it can do is lift the prohibition by the use of "all necessary means". And that was, as I stated, ALREADY CITED AND IMPLICIT in UNSC 1441. What France wanted to do was create an unprecented event of having the UN actually specify the particular actions that a member state could utilize in enforcing the resolutions passed by the UNSC. And that would be a violation, and usurping, of the sovereign rights of every member. Hawk