Can someone explain to me again how can US go behind UNs back to enforce UN resolution?

[halik]

something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

 

[Wallydraigle]

repost

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: lirion
repost

oh good...now for the followup question WHO CARES

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

But if we go in to Iraq without specific UN SC authorization, it is a violation of the UN charter.
Edit: Oh ya, Iraq didn't kick out the inspectors in 98.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

But if we go in to Iraq without specific UN SC authorization, it is a violation of the UN charter.

OMG, I am scared. The UN is going to get us. Just look how Saddam is shaking in his boots.

Get real the UN is useless and serves NO purpose.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Poeple seem to think that hypocricy and lying is okay provided that it's your own leaders that are doing it for your (apparently) own good. I'm personally of the viewpoint that no one should be doing any of that on my behalf. (but secretly I'm glad that there are a lot of tough guys in the military who aren't afraid to do that stuff on my behalf so that I can spout bullsh!t on internet boards and use the freedom that they fight and die for)

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

The UN has brought this on themselves. Why should N Korea fear the UN. Why should any country fear the UN. They have proven that they will not enforce anything. They have made themselves obsolete.

EDIT: BTW I am agreeing with you SlowSS

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Poeple seem to think that hypocricy and lying is okay provided that it's your own leaders that are doing it for your (apparently) own good. I'm personally of the viewpoint that no one should be doing any of that on my behalf. (but secretly I'm glad that there are a lot of tough guys in the military who aren't afraid to do that stuff on my behalf so that I can spout bullsh!t on internet boards and use the freedom that they fight and die for)

I know, it's great to be an American!!!!

 

[Dragnov]

Done it before, will do it again.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

 

[halik]

thats great, noone actually answered my question....



I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

As far as i recollect, they signed the treaty with allied forced (in other words UN). It's their resolution, not US resolution. Whats stops iraq from doing the same thing? Israel is in violation of the same exact treaty, iraq might as well bomb it because they feel threatened. Its a pre emptive strike after all.

What people cease to see is the pandoras box that Bush is about to open. If theres a previous case of pre emptive strike, any coutry could find a violation on their enemy and blast them to kingdom come (Kashmir anyone?)

I guess this is where the ubiquitous american arrogance comes in place. You guys dont need the rest of the world right? We can nuke anything and everything, we are the world. I wish there was more of a global common sense present in US, i mean 90% of crap that we buy comes from countries other than US (CHINA)

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

Well I am sure you know that Bush doesn't write his speeches. He should have been smart enough to not agree with what his speech writers came up with but obviously he wasn't. I have never thought that having the smartest person as president was a good idea. I want someone smart ENOUGH to know that they need good advisors.

I personally think Bush has good advisors although I certainly don't like his pick for Attorney General. Bush is not a good diplomat and never will be. That is why he has Colin Powell to handle some of the work. Powell is well liked generally by the world.

I certainly don't think Bush is a moron but he is a very poor public speaker which makes him look like a moron.

Blair is a good speaker and helps clean up some of the messes Bush makes with the Europeans.

 

[halik]

on that note though, i think powell would make a good presidential candidate. He seems to be the force behind everything (pinkie and the brain ) If george would shut up with his factless speeches and let someone else make the case for the world, im sure they would get lot more support. Crap like the war on terror/ axis of evil / same cliches over and over does make the whole iraq thing shady

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

Well I am sure you know that Bush doesn't write his speeches. He should have been smart enough to not agree with what his speech writers came up with but obviously he wasn't. I have never thought that having the smartest person as president was a good idea. I want someone smart ENOUGH to know that they need good advisors.

I personally think Bush has good advisors although I certainly don't like his pick for Attorney General. Bush is not a good diplomat and never will be. That is why he has Colin Powell to handle some of the work. Powell is well liked generally by the world.

I certainly don't think Bush is a moron but he is a very poor public speaker which makes him look like a moron.

Blair is a good speaker and helps clean up some of the messes Bush makes with the Europeans.

When I speak of Bushes poor Diplomatic Skills I mean his administrations. Frankly I believe that diplomatic gaffs by his Administration may be the cause for the rift between us and our Allies. But then when you take into consideration that one of the Allies is the Pissy French it might have been a lost cause to begin with. Dealing with the Frogs you need to have a PHD in PC Speek.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: halik
thats great, noone actually answered my question....



I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

As far as i recollect, they signed the treaty with allied forced (in other words UN). It's their resolution, not US resolution. Whats stops iraq from doing the same thing? Israel is in violation of the same exact treaty, iraq might as well bomb it because they feel threatened. Its a pre emptive strike after all.

What people cease to see is the pandoras box that Bush is about to open. If theres a previous case of pre emptive strike, any coutry could find a violation on their enemy and blast them to kingdom come (Kashmir anyone?)

What you don't see if that we signed something in good faith that it would be enforced. Every country in the UN OPENLY ADMITS THEY KNOW IRAQ HAS WMD. Everyone knows this. They just want to continue inspecting.

Since Iraq has not disarmed and the treaty we signed in good faith has not been enforced for 10 years, I feel that the "contract" has been broken by both Iraq and the UN. Iraq destroyed it when they kicked the inspectors out in 98.

Why should we care about what the UN thinks if they won't enforce their own policies on Iraq???

 

[docmanhattan]

Originally posted by: halik
thats great, noone actually answered my question....



I can tell you easily. We signed a cease fire with Iraq on the basis they allow inspectors to disarm them. When they kicked them out in 1998, they broke the cease fire and we can go kick their ass anytime we please.....

As far as i recollect, they signed the treaty with allied forced (in other words UN). It's their resolution, not US resolution. Whats stops iraq from doing the same thing? Israel is in violation of the same exact treaty, iraq might as well bomb it because they feel threatened. Its a pre emptive strike after all.

What people cease to see is the pandoras box that Bush is about to open. If theres a previous case of pre emptive strike, any coutry could find a violation on their enemy and blast them to kingdom come (Kashmir anyone?)

I guess this is where the ubiquitous american arrogance comes in place. You guys dont need the rest of the world right? We can nuke anything and everything, we are the world. I wish there was more of a global common sense present in US, i mean 90% of crap that we buy comes from countries other than US (CHINA)

the problem is that your question assumes that the UN actually holds any authority and further that a UN chater supercedes a direct treatise that was made between Iraq and the US.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

Well I am sure you know that Bush doesn't write his speeches. He should have been smart enough to not agree with what his speech writers came up with but obviously he wasn't. I have never thought that having the smartest person as president was a good idea. I want someone smart ENOUGH to know that they need good advisors.

I personally think Bush has good advisors although I certainly don't like his pick for Attorney General. Bush is not a good diplomat and never will be. That is why he has Colin Powell to handle some of the work. Powell is well liked generally by the world.

I certainly don't think Bush is a moron but he is a very poor public speaker which makes him look like a moron.

Blair is a good speaker and helps clean up some of the messes Bush makes with the Europeans.

When I speak of Bushes poor Diplomatic Skills I mean his administrations. Frankly I believe that diplomatic gaffs by his Administration may be the cause for the rift between us and our Allies. But then when you take into consideration that one of the Allies is the Pissy French it might have been a lost cause to begin with. Dealing with the Frogs you need to have a PHD in PC Speek.

I totally agree about the french but I still have trouble understanding it. I went to Europe in '96 and the french were very nice to me. Everyone in France treated me well. Maybe it was a fluke. But from what I have witnessed, I just feel it is the French government that is causes the riff between the US and France.

I think the France government hates that the US is so powerful. They just can't handle it. I think that also applies to Germany. I visited there in '96 also and the people were kind and generous.

I just think our "allies" have other agendas that they are pursueing.

During my trip through Europe the only people that were rude to me were in Rome, Italy. It wasn't an isolated case either. As a whole, my group of friends were all treated badly in Rome. Of course when we went to other parts of Italy we were treated well.

 

[FoBoT]

it is a matter of interpreting the resolution

the US govt is saying that the way 1441 is worded, the US (or any UN nation/security council memeber? i guess?) can go in and enforce a violation of 1441

the US is saying its own interpretation of a "violation" has already occured, therefore miltary action can be taken now without further resolutions from the security council

you would need a freakin lawyer to wade through the wording of those resolutions and then of course nobodys lawyer would agree with any body else, so who knows

bottom line, the US Govt will do what it thinks is in the best interest of the US , not the UN , the US is a sovereign nation, we will not put the UN ahead of our interests, which is a good reason to remove ourselves from the UN

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: halik
on that note though, i think powell would make a good presidential candidate. He seems to be the force behind everything (pinkie and the brain ) If george would shut up with his factless speeches and let someone else make the case for the world, im sure they would get lot more support. Crap like the war on terror/ axis of evil / same cliches over and over does make the whole iraq thing shady

His failed attempt last week to link Al Qaeda with Hussien went over like a Led Balloon.

I believe that if this issue dooms the credibility of the UN and helps with the downfall of NATO I think that OBL should consider it a victory for his cause. I also believe that OBL is pleased that his speech was used by Powel and the US to try and link Iraq and Al Qaeda together because a war with Iraq is exactly what he believes is needed to drum up more support from the rest of the Muslim World for his cause. That's why I believe that we should do everything in our Power to heal this rift,even if it means giving the Inspectors more time like France and Germany want. If we are going to have to deal with a large portion of the wolrds population hating us we'll need all the help we can get from Europe and the West.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

Let's face it, vest majority of politicians live and die by public opinion and polls, especially Clinton, he lacked the courage to against polls.
About the only thing Clinton did right was the intervention of Yugoslavia, even then, I thought we should of reacted sooner.
Also, I am so sick of bickering of both parties and just toeing a party line. These damn politicians are tools for not uniting and doing what is right for the american people,
it's not just with this situation with Iraq, they bicker about every issue dealing with domestic policies, which is only hurting american people.

Yeah, I agree with you of EU's perception of Bush, which is creating lot of turmoil, but, I have to respect them for sticking to their gun regardless of how unpopular it is.

BTW, I too think Saudi's are as bad as Iran and Iraq.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: halik
something doesnt add up...
Even if iraq violates UN resolution, how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution.

Isn't that sort of like me going off shooting some rapist while he was in court to get his sentance? I mean he was guilty after all.

If UN did their job and punish those who violate UN resolution, we won't be a position that we are in now.

I think if Clinton would have pressured them to do it then they might have. Unfortunately he had to deal with the Republicans at home who were inflamed because he lied about getting a Blow Job. Of course if Blow Job Billy hadn't of lied he and Congress might have been able to do their job instead of playing Partisan Petty Politics.

Unfortunately I actually think that there are those in Europe who have the perception the Bush is a Nationalistic Moron who should be opposed every chance possible. Just because he said ill advised things like "Either you are with us or against us" and railed about the "Axis of Evil" inflaming the NK's and the Iranians while failing to mention the Saudi's doesn't mean that he is a moron, just not a very good diplomat.


Good thing we have the Deputy Governor of West Texas, Tony Blair, on our side interpreting the Bushism's for the rest of the Euros or we'd be in deep Do Do with them.

Let's face it, vest majority of politicians live and die by public opinion and polls, especially Clinton, he lacked the courage to against polls.
About the only thing Clinton did right was the intervention of Yugoslavia, even then, I thought we should of reacted sooner.
Also, I am so sick of bickering of both parties and just toeing a party line. These damn politicians are tools for not uniting and doing what is right for the american people,
it's not just with this situation with Iraq, they bicker about every issue dealing with domestic policies, which is only hurting american people.

Yeah, I agree with you of EU's perception of Bush, which is creating lot of turmoil, but, I have to respect them for sticking to their gun regardless of how unpopular it is.

BTW, I too think Saudi's are as bad as Iran and Iraq.

Do you actually believe that Bush would be pursuing disarming Hussien with Military action if the polls here in the States indicated that the vast Majority of Americans opposed it? I know that Tony Blair is sticking to his guns despite the polls in Britian showing that the majority are against it. Many of the other Leaders in Europe who are siding with Bush are doing so despite the polls in their countries indicating that it's a very unpopular position to take. Of course in Bushes case he'd have to pay attention since it is going to be American Servicemen and American Taxpayers who are going to be executing and paying for these actions for the most part.

 

[wnied]

how can you go behind UNs back to punish someone for violation a UN resolution

Because They represent a clear and present danger to our countries sovreignty & safety. By building WOMD and selling them for profit to undesireables in the world, they can give any crackpot the power to mass murder hundreds of thousands at the flick of a switch...

...Just like North Korea is doing currently.
~wnied~

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Do you actually believe that Bush would be pursuing disarming Hussien with Military action if the polls here in the States indicated that the vast Majority of Americans opposed it? I know that Tony Blair is sticking to his guns despite the polls in Britian showing that the majority are against it. Many of the other Leaders in Europe who are siding with Bush are doing so despite the polls in their countries indicating that it's a very unpopular position to take. Of course in Bushes case he'd have to pay attention since it is going to be American Servicemen and American Taxpayers who are going to be executing and paying for these actions for the most part.

I don't know for certain if bush would still purue Iraq if majority of americans opposes the war, but his popularity has slowly declined since 9/11, mainly because of his stance of war against Iraq.
If over 50% of americans opposed the war, I don't think congress would authorize use of force against Iraq, which in turn will tie bush's hands.