A different Iraq poll: How much is "completing the mission" worth to YOU?

[KrazyHorse]

Basically, I agree with Az.

If I could save the many thousands of Iraqi, American, British etc. lives that will be lost in this conflict the I would jump on the grenade.

The chances of me being given that opportunity are nil.

[Cyclotron]

I was under the impression that armed conflict against another state is explicitly illegal by the UN charter unless

1) The state is acting in self defense, or collective self defense, or
2) The action has been approved by the security council.

Since neither of these were fulfilled, I don't see why it matters what the specific resolution of the General Assembly said. The SC never gave the go-ahead for an attack, and the idea that this was in self defense is laughable.

[Patroklos]

1) The state is acting in self defense, or collective self defense, or

The violation of the ceasefire is a textbook example of the second.

The action has been approved by the security council.

Unless you are simple being obtuse, the violation of 1441 is obvioulsy that.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Patroklos
The violation of the ceasefire is a textbook example of the second.

Really? And I thought WMDs were the casus belli.

Unless you are simple being obtuse, the violation of 1441 is obvioulsy that.

Emphasis added.

From Resolution 678 (1991)

2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in paragraph 1 above, the above-mentioned resolutions, to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;

From Resolution 1441(2002)

1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq’s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

Are you proposing that a decision that Iraq is in material breach of a resolution - certainly not a first in the world of international politics - is the equivalent of an authorization to use all neccessary means in order to enforce compliance?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Unless you are simple being obtuse, the violation of 1441 is obvioulsy that.

I'm obtuse. The UN did not authorize the Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq.

Hmmm...I've never seen anybody mention Iraq's many violations of the cease-fire agreement. I wonder why not? It seems a better justficiation of the invation than anything advanced by the Bush Administration.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Hmmm...I've never seen anybody mention Iraq's many violations of the cease-fire agreement. I wonder why not?

Kosovo would seem to provide more than enough precedent for the Iraq invasion.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


I'm obtuse. The UN did not authorize the Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq.

Hmmm...I've never seen anybody mention Iraq's many violations of the cease-fire agreement. I wonder why not? It seems a better justficiation of the invation than anything advanced by the Bush Administration.

Because it is a moronic causus belli. After all, the US would have to prove that Iraq had WMD's before it could claim that Iraq had violated anything- plus the no fly zones (not authorized by the UN) were in themselves probably an obvious breaking of the cease fire by the US and UK. Lets not forget thaqt the US was bombing Iraq regularly in the south months prior to March 2003.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Kosovo would seem to provide more than enough precedent for the Iraq invasion.

Actually, none, since there was no immidiate humanitarian crisis in Iraq at the time of the invasion.

[DinoDoc]

I don't think that has any relevence to the legality of the interventions by either "Coalition of the Willing."

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I don't think that has any relevence to the legality of the interventions by either "Coalition of the Willing."

Yes it does. extenuating circumstances. NATO in the Kosovo incursion made no attempt to jsutify its actions based on UN precedent.

AND NATO made no move to remove the Serbian government- it moved to limit or end direct Serbian control over part of its own nation- in that you probably look back at Iraq itself and US and UK denial of Iraqs sovereign right to control of its airspace throught the mandatory no flight zones.

Its an old trope form you, but even if both situations were technically illegal under the UN rules, there is a world of difference in the justifications given, plus the aims were very different in scope.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by GePap
Its an old trope form you, but even if both situations were technically illegal under the UN rules,

Technically? How am I being nit-picky here?

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Technically? How am I being nit-picky here?

2nd degree manslaughter and first degree murder are both crimes in which someone gets killed. They are NOT even close to being morally or legally the same though.

That is what you keep doing-equating one act of limited importance to the international community and with equally limited future applications (Kosovo) vs one of FAR greater influence to the international community, more varied application, and much graver (Iraq).

Its a lesson of at best minimal importance, yet to drag it out every time like your prize pony. Its sad.

[Vesayen]

Number's dont lie, people just lie with them .

60% of Apolytonites just want to leave.

[Ted Striker]

There have been approximatley 900,000 troops rotated out of Iraq so far

About 100,000 of them have applied for help from the VA

Can't remember where I heard the stat

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Basically, I agree with Az.

If I could save the many thousands of Iraqi, American, British etc. lives that will be lost in this conflict the I would jump on the grenade.

The chances of me being given that opportunity are nil.