| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Timothy-Allen Albertson" |
| Date: |
05 Mar 2004 03:18:03 PM |
| Object: |
No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
Report: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq
LONDON, March 4 (UPI) -- Legal advisers to the British cabinet said a
U.N. resolution did not authorize the government to wage war in Iraq,
The Independent said Thursday.
U.N. Resolution 1441 was passed in 2002 by the Security Council,
giving Saddam Hussein a final opportunity to disarm. Prime Minister
Tony Blair used it as grounds for joining the United States in war in
Iraq.
Blair is under pressure to fully disclose his legal advice -- a move
he is resisting.
But the newspaper said a Foreign Office memorandum came to light
saying there was no automatic justification for the use of force based
on Resolution 1441.
Following pressure from military chiefs, the attorney general did
publish a short summary of his legal opinion, issued last March 17,
three days before the war began. The 358-word summary gave a rough
outline of the case for military action, stating the U.N. resolution
authorized the use of force because it revived earlier resolutions
passed at the end of the Gulf War in 1991.
The advice goes on to state U.N. Resolution 1441 warned of "serious
consequences" if Iraq failed to comply with its disarmament
obligations.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040304-112720-3622r.htm
.
|
|
| User: "Jason Gallas" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 05:36:51 PM |
|
|
"Timothy-Allen Albertson" <Tim_Allen_Albertson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a5695439.0403051318.1382ccc8@posting.google.com...
: Report: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq
:
: LONDON, March 4 (UPI) -- Legal advisers to the British cabinet said a
: U.N. resolution did not authorize the government to wage war in Iraq,
: The Independent said Thursday.
:
: U.N. Resolution 1441 was passed in 2002 by the Security Council,
: giving Saddam Hussein a final opportunity to disarm. Prime Minister
: Tony Blair used it as grounds for joining the United States in war in
: Iraq.
:
: Blair is under pressure to fully disclose his legal advice -- a move
: he is resisting.
:
: But the newspaper said a Foreign Office memorandum came to light
: saying there was no automatic justification for the use of force based
: on Resolution 1441.
:
: Following pressure from military chiefs, the attorney general did
: publish a short summary of his legal opinion, issued last March 17,
: three days before the war began. The 358-word summary gave a rough
: outline of the case for military action, stating the U.N. resolution
: authorized the use of force because it revived earlier resolutions
: passed at the end of the Gulf War in 1991.
:
: The advice goes on to state U.N. Resolution 1441 warned of "serious
: consequences" if Iraq failed to comply with its disarmament
: obligations.
:
: http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040304-112720-3622r.htm
And war was not a serious enough consequence for you?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 03:51:08 PM |
|
|
"Timothy-Allen Albertson" <Tim_Allen_Albertson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a5695439.0403051318.1382ccc8@posting.google.com...
Report: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq
LONDON, March 4 (UPI) -- Legal advisers to the British cabinet said a
U.N. resolution did not authorize the government to wage war in Iraq,
The Independent said Thursday.
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FrankA" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 01:24:09 AM |
|
|
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
Well, NO. The UN is a treaty. It was created to avert and AVOID war.
As per the CONSTITUTION of the US, the UN charter is the supreme law
of the land. The UN is NOT some abstract "debating society", it is a
set of international LAWS that the US is OBLIGATED to follow. The same
things that the Nazi's were tried for at Neurenburg, are the very same
things that Bushie and his administration have done with regards to
Iraq. Look up the definition of "Preventive War".
Also, the reason that the UN nations are often unable to come up with
solutions to violations of international law (IE...Israel)is because
the US and England simly have TOO much power, and are by FAR the
leaders in VETOING resolutions that would serve to champion the cause
of human rights all over the world.
The US should NEVER violate international law, as we have blatently
benn doing for the last 50 years. Cuba, Panama, Haiti, Guatemala, East
Timor, Israel, Chile, Grenada, Nicaragua, etc...
Read the constitution, and UN article 51.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dean Tran" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 09:38:30 PM |
|
|
UN is a convenient body of the rich, serves the interests of the rich
who pay for its existence which can be discarded as needed.
frankamendola@sbcglobal.net (FrankA) wrote in message news:<a73656d.0403052324.1c7704d3@posting.google.com>...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
Well, NO. The UN is a treaty. It was created to avert and AVOID war.
As per the CONSTITUTION of the US, the UN charter is the supreme law
of the land. The UN is NOT some abstract "debating society", it is a
set of international LAWS that the US is OBLIGATED to follow. The same
things that the Nazi's were tried for at Neurenburg, are the very same
things that Bushie and his administration have done with regards to
Iraq. Look up the definition of "Preventive War".
Also, the reason that the UN nations are often unable to come up with
solutions to violations of international law (IE...Israel)is because
the US and England simly have TOO much power, and are by FAR the
leaders in VETOING resolutions that would serve to champion the cause
of human rights all over the world.
The US should NEVER violate international law, as we have blatently
benn doing for the last 50 years. Cuba, Panama, Haiti, Guatemala, East
Timor, Israel, Chile, Grenada, Nicaragua, etc...
Read the constitution, and UN article 51.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "zepp" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 08:53:42 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 15:51:08 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"Timothy-Allen Albertson" <Tim_Allen_Albertson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a5695439.0403051318.1382ccc8@posting.google.com...
Report: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq
LONDON, March 4 (UPI) -- Legal advisers to the British cabinet said a
U.N. resolution did not authorize the government to wage war in Iraq,
The Independent said Thursday.
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
-
Kerry served in Vietnam and got a silver star.
Putsch served in the National Guard and got a silver filling.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 08:58:45 PM |
|
|
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There
is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over,
and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was
in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an
upper bound on thread length in those groups.
.
|
|
|
| User: "D Kat" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 11:25:03 PM |
|
|
Does this mean if I want to end a thread all I have to do is say NAZI! ? Oh
wait.... you already did that and it didn't work... Oh well.
DK
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:16b2c.21386$JN2.5552@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
There
is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over,
and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument
was
in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an
upper bound on thread length in those groups.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LawsonE" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
05 Mar 2004 11:32:23 PM |
|
|
"D Kat" <disisdkat@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Pgd2c.709$Ak2.534895@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Does this mean if I want to end a thread all I have to do is say NAZI! ?
Oh
wait.... you already did that and it didn't work... Oh well.
DK
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:16b2c.21386$JN2.5552@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
There
is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is
over,
and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument
was
in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of
an
upper bound on thread length in those groups.
Goodwin's Law only makes sense if the comparison to Hitler and or the Nazis
is blatantly flawed, BTW.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 12:12:06 PM |
|
|
"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Hnd2c.21256$yZ1.10368@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Goodwin's Law only makes sense if the comparison to Hitler and or the Nazis
is blatantly flawed, BTW.
I disagree. Our language affords us many ways to address issues/situations
without the use of either of those words ... unless you are adressing them
directly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "gaffo" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 05:45:05 PM |
|
|
Bob wrote:
"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Hnd2c.21256$yZ1.10368@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Goodwin's Law only makes sense if the comparison to Hitler and or the Nazis
is blatantly flawed, BTW.
I disagree. Our language affords us many ways to address issues/situations
without the use of either of those words ... unless you are adressing them
directly.
wrong...............you defend the same ideals as the Nazi Germans -
blind force. no regard for the Rule of Law - arrogant mindless Nationalism.
so people calling you a Nazi is fair game.
--
RUSSERT: Are you prepared to lose?
BUSH: No, I'm not going to lose.
RUSSERT: If you did, what would you do?
BUSH: Well, I don't plan on losing. I've got a vision for what I want to
do for the country.
See, I know exactly where I want to lead.................And we got
changing times
here in America, too., 2/8/04
"And that's very important for, I think, the people to understand where
I'm coming from,
to know that this is a dangerous world. I wish it wasn't. I'm a war
president.
I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign policy matters with
war on my mind.
- pResident of the United State of America, 2/8/04
"Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that
based on intelligence, that he has been very, very good at hiding
these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know
he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
- Vice President ***** Cheney, on "Meet the Press", 3/16/03
"I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the
Iraqis had nuclear weapons."
- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, 6/24/03
"I think in this case international law
stood in the way of doing the right thing (invading Iraq)."
- Richard Perle
"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with
respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project
conventional power against his neighbours."
- Colin Powell February 24 2001
"We have been successful for the last ten years in keeping
him from developing those weapons and we will continue to be successful."
"He threatens not the United States."
"But I also thought that we had pretty
much removed his stings and frankly for ten years we really have."
'But what is interesting is that with the regime that has been in place
for the past ten years, I think a pretty good job has been done of
keeping him from breaking out and suddenly showing up one day and saying
"look what I got." He hasn't been able to do that.'
- Colin Powell February 26 2001
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "zepp" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 08:59:57 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There
is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over,
and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was
in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an
upper bound on thread length in those groups.
-
Kerry served in Vietnam and got a silver star.
Putsch served in the National Guard and got a silver filling.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Fraud Kerry" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 09:11:40 AM |
|
|
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fafnir" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 02:47:45 PM |
|
|
In article <MSl2c.494873$na.1170015@attbi_s04>
"John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions
with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an
expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to
justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked
the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
You're confused.
John Kerry won't become President until Jan 20, 2005.
When the most irresponsible president in history is removed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Okamura" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
07 Mar 2004 01:14:54 PM |
|
|
"Fafnir" <fritz@spamexpire-200403.rodent.frell.eu.org> wrote in message
news:f4394b7801b06dfc5a9bb2fc9c7be7b5@remailer.frell.eu.org...
In article <MSl2c.494873$na.1170015@attbi_s04>
"John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions
with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an
expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to
justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked
the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
You're confused.
No, you are the one that is confused. Kerry voted to give the President
approval to go to war with Iraq.
.
|
|
|
| User: "D Kat" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
07 Mar 2004 06:00:07 PM |
|
|
Actually that was not how it was framed to congress. Bush had the power
just as Clinton had to invade Iraq with or without congressal approval. W
Bush shamelessly LIED and told congress that if they passed the resolution
he was asking for that it would be a show of power so that he would not have
to go to war. Plain and Simple. Once agian W LIES!!!! DKat
"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:OwK2c.14843$4o3.3761@twister.socal.rr.com...
"Fafnir" <fritz@spamexpire-200403.rodent.frell.eu.org> wrote in message
news:f4394b7801b06dfc5a9bb2fc9c7be7b5@remailer.frell.eu.org...
In article <MSl2c.494873$na.1170015@attbi_s04>
"John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions
with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an
expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to
justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked
the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
You're confused.
No, you are the one that is confused. Kerry voted to give the President
approval to go to war with Iraq.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "CH" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
07 Mar 2004 02:26:41 PM |
|
|
In news:OwK2c.14843$4o3.3761@twister.socal.rr.com,
Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> typed:
"Fafnir" <fritz@spamexpire-200403.rodent.frell.eu.org> wrote in
message news:f4394b7801b06dfc5a9bb2fc9c7be7b5@remailer.frell.eu.org...
In article <MSl2c.494873$na.1170015@attbi_s04>
"John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with
specific charges and vague remedies. They are little more than
an
expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to
justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked
the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
You're confused.
No, you are the one that is confused. Kerry voted to give the
President approval to go to war with Iraq.
Kerry is actually the confused party here...he voted against the first Gulf
war....for the second Gulf war.....but now claims to have been misled about
voting for the second war.....he seems quite confused. He makes a better
candidate for town idiot than President.
Doesn't our Constitution's Preamble say "...provide for the common
defense, promote the general welfare..."? Our Liberal "friends" would
rather us believe it's "promote the common defense, provide general
welfare.......".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "banjocat" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 09:35:45 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 15:11:40 GMT, "John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups.
Try again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "TBone" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 01:07:47 PM |
|
|
banjocat <banjocat@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<8prj40dk8s9jvv5snc7je5dodal033s34g@4ax.com>...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 15:11:40 GMT, "John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups.
Try again.
As a measure of invovling the Congress President Bush submitted a
Congressional Resolution for a vote on how to deal with Saddam
Hussein. The Congress (including) Kerry voted overwhelmingly in favor
of the resolution.
In other words, President Bush sought the approval of Congress before
acting against Saddam Hussein, even though he did not have to. Kerry
and everyone else approved.
I am going too fast for you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "banjocat" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Kerry's War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 09:41:37 PM |
|
|
(TBone) wrote in message news:<90282bc8.0403061107.20e5fbbe@posting.google.com>...
banjocat <banjocat@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<8prj40dk8s9jvv5snc7je5dodal033s34g@4ax.com>...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 15:11:40 GMT, "John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups.
Try again.
As a measure of invovling the Congress President Bush submitted a
Congressional Resolution for a vote on how to deal with Saddam
Hussein. The Congress (including) Kerry voted overwhelmingly in favor
of the resolution.
In other words, President Bush sought the approval of Congress before
acting against Saddam Hussein, even though he did not have to. Kerry
and everyone else approved.
I am going too fast for you?
You're trying to pull a fast one but, you didn't get away with it.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups. You've said
nothing that refutes that fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "America" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for Bush's War in Iraq |
07 Mar 2004 06:30:18 AM |
|
|
On 6 Mar 2004 19:41:37 -0800, (banjocat) wrote:
mrtim5700@yahoo.com (TBone) wrote in message news:<90282bc8.0403061107.20e5fbbe@posting.google.com>...
banjocat < > wrote in message news:<8prj40dk8s9jvv5snc7je5dodal033s34g@4ax.com>...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 15:11:40 GMT, "John Fraud Kerry" <JFK@DNC.com>
wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:1qpj40te0o16h76hhm20iim1ts3hc2b9rg@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:58:45 -0600, "Bob" <no@email.address> wrote:
"zepp" <zeppnospam@finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:n8fi4056ur01ibqil5l3qbo50dnl4gplc0@4ax.com...
That's the problem with the U.N. They write resolutions with specific
charges
and vague remedies. They are little more than an expensive debating
society.
And yet here you are clinging desperately to a Hitlerian
interpretation of one of their resolutions in order to justify your
little forey into mass murder.
Godwin's Law
And yet, you still insist that those evil Czechs attacked the freedom
loving people of Germany, forcing war upon them, right?
And yet John Kerry AUTHORIZED the war in Iraq.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups.
Try again.
As a measure of invovling the Congress President Bush submitted a
Congressional Resolution for a vote on how to deal with Saddam
Hussein. The Congress (including) Kerry voted overwhelmingly in favor
of the resolution.
In other words, President Bush sought the approval of Congress before
acting against Saddam Hussein, even though he did not have to. Kerry
and everyone else approved.
I am going too fast for you?
You're trying to pull a fast one but, you didn't get away with it.
Only the President can authorize the sending of troups. You've said
nothing that refutes that fact.
Right.
It was Bush's illegal invasion.
Trying to blame anyone else for it is ludicrous.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq |
06 Mar 2004 12:58:24 AM |
|
|
UPI = Moonie *****
"Timothy-Allen Albertson" <Tim_Allen_Albertson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a5695439.0403051318.1382ccc8@posting.google.com...
Report: No Legal Basis for War in Iraq
LONDON, March 4 (UPI) -- Legal advisers to the British cabinet said a
U.N. resolution did not authorize the government to wage war in Iraq,
The Independent said Thursday.
U.N. Resolution 1441 was passed in 2002 by the Security Council,
giving Saddam Hussein a final opportunity to disarm. Prime Minister
Tony Blair used it as grounds for joining the United States in war in
Iraq.
Blair is under pressure to fully disclose his legal advice -- a move
he is resisting.
But the newspaper said a Foreign Office memorandum came to light
saying there was no automatic justification for the use of force based
on Resolution 1441.
Following pressure from military chiefs, the attorney general did
publish a short summary of his legal opinion, issued last March 17,
three days before the war began. The 358-word summary gave a rough
outline of the case for military action, stating the U.N. resolution
authorized the use of force because it revived earlier resolutions
passed at the end of the Gulf War in 1991.
The advice goes on to state U.N. Resolution 1441 warned of "serious
consequences" if Iraq failed to comply with its disarmament
obligations.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040304-112720-3622r.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
