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: mistermj who wrote (216372)	2/5/2007 3:56:58 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

It is unclear whether it was illegal. The UN certainly did not authorize, or contemplate such an invasion, thus their extremely carefully worded resolutions on Iran recently. Which I'm sure you've noticed. "Prof Sands says Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassador at the time, told a foreign colleague he was "clearly uncomfortable" about the failure to get a second resolution. Foreign Office lawyers consistently warned that an invasion would be regarded as unlawful. The book reveals that Elizabeth Wilmshurst, the FO's deputy chief legal adviser who resigned over the war, told the Butler inquiry into the use of intelligence during the run-up to the war, of her belief that Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, shared the FO view. According to private evidence to the Butler inquiry, Lord Goldsmith told FO lawyers in early 2003: "The prime minister has told me that I cannot give advice, but you know what my views are". On March 7 2003 he advised the prime minister that the Bush administration believed that a case could be made for an invasion without a second UN resolution. But he warned that Britain could be challenged in the international criminal court. Ten days later, he said a second resolution was not necessary." While you may not think it was illegal, there is nothing "obvious" about it.

To: mistermj who wrote (216372)	2/5/2007 8:23:36 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Iraq war illegal, says Annan news.bbc.co.uk The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter. He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally. The UK government responded by saying the attorney-general made the "legal basis... clear at the time". Mr Annan also warned security in Iraq must considerably improve if credible elections are to be held in January. The UN chief said in an interview with the BBC World Service that "painful lessons" had been learnt since the war in Iraq. "Lessons for the US, the UN and other member states. I think in the end everybody's concluded it's best to work together with our allies and through the UN," he said. 'Valid' "I hope we do not see another Iraq-type operation for a long time - without UN approval and much broader support from the international community," he added. He said he believed there should have been a second UN resolution following Iraq's failure to comply over weapons inspections. And it should have been up to the Security Council to approve or determine the consequences, he added. When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal." You can not have credible elections if the security conditions continue as they are now Kofi Annan Mr Annan's comments provoked angry suggestions from a former Bush administration aide that they were timed to influence the US November election. "I think it is outrageous for the Secretary-General, who ultimately works for the member states, to try and supplant his judgement for the judgement of the member states," Randy Scheunemann, a former advisor to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told the BBC. "To do this 51 days before an American election reeks of political interference." A UK foreign office spokeswoman said: "The Attorney-General made the government's position on the legal basis for the use of military force in Iraq clear at the time". Australian Prime Minister John Howard also rejected Mr Annan's remarks, saying the legal advice he was given was "entirely valid". The BBC's Susannah Price at UN headquarters in New York says Mr Annan has made similar comments before. He has said from the beginning the invasion did not conform with the UN charter - phrasing that was seen as a diplomatic way of saying the war was illegal. Our correspondent says Mr Annan's relationship with the US might be made a little uncomfortable for a while following his comments, but both sides are likely to want to play it down. US President George W Bush is due to speak at the UN General Assembly next week. Iraq elections Mr Annan also said in the interview the UN would give advice and assistance in the run-up to the elections, but it was up to the Iraqi interim government to decide whether such a vote should go ahead. He warned there could not be "credible elections if the security conditions continue as they are now". The UK foreign office spokeswoman said there was a full commitment to hold elections in January. Election and political party laws had already been passed and an independent electoral commission established. "The task is huge and the deadline tight, but the Iraqi people clearly want elections," she said. On Wednesday, the head of the British army General Sir Mike Jackson said national elections in Iraq were still on track. On Monday, Iraq's interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said elections must go ahead as planned although he conceded the violence might stop some Iraqis voting. However, a day later a car bomb close to an Iraqi police station in central Baghdad killed 47 people and gunmen opened fire on a police minibus in Baquba, killing 12.