Kofi Annan: Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter

[Davros]

We practiced "Might equals right" on Saddam's arse - I remain in favour of that, but I do believe in consistency in ethics. If arab countries had decided to follow the same path in Israel we would have decided it was illegal and stepped in.

[Timber Loftis]

Agreed, Davros, and if Tehran, Damascus, and Jordan decided to do exactly what you suggest, we'd certainly get to watch one big fat Zionist can of whoopass get cracked open. I wasn't alive in 1967 to witness one of the boldest military moves since WWII -- it would be interesting to see what it looks like when the Israeli badasses really decide to kick butt.

Happy Rashashana, btw, everyone.

[ 09-16-2004, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Ronn_Bman]

Force has never been authorized against Israel, so any comparison between Iraq and Israel is empty. Without a call for action, there certainly has never been a cease fire that Israel could break to allow a return to fighting that was never authorized.

You don't have to agree with the war in Iraq, as Timber plainly does not, to understand that the cease fire at the end of Desert Storm was conditional. There was never any resolution or agreement that stated further resolutions would be necessary in the event of a failure of the Iraqi's to cooperate fully with the conditions of that ceasefire. When those conditions were ignored and/or violated, the reason for the cease fire ceased to exist. Just because a political approach was tried for a dozen years and through further resolutions doesn't invalidate the initial resolution that allowed force.

Believing that the war was wrong, or even believing it was not in the spirit of the later resolutions, doesn't invalidate that initial authority to act. Now maybe the UN wished to take that authority back, but they never tried. Of course they would have failed, but they could have at least tried the political approach before crying foul on the issue.

The law is full of technicalities. Some work for you, some work against you...

[ 09-16-2004, 06:37 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Davros]

I wasn't coming into the argument about how wise or not it would be to declare war on a neighbour with nukes dude. I was arguing ethics, and ethically, we in the west would declare such a move on the part of Syria et al to be an illegal act of war and we would pull out our cricket bats (or in your case, baseball bats) and go in swinging.

I reiterate that I support the removal of Sadman, and I like to feel sheleterd by the fiction that non-compliance to UN resolutions is a shelter, but ethically it is just a pile of bollocks if we refuse others the right to take action under that same protection. And that is without going into the fact that all those resolutions wouldn't have been there if our intel sources hadn't been so useless. If the CIA gest it right and declares it laughable that they have WOMD then there are no resolutions and there is no illegal war.

[Timber Loftis]

In case you haven't noticed, my ethics are largely dictated by the law. I don't have a standing of authority when it comes to ethics, so I default to what's legal. And, on the legal side, Mr. Legal Eagle Bman does make a good point. The 1967 buildup/threat action against Israel was never authorized, but Desert Storm was overwhelmingly authorized.

[Ronn_Bman]

I'm not arguing that the invasion of Iraq was ethical, and as I said, it may have been against the 'spirit' of those later resolutions.

I'll even agree that it WAS against the spirit of those later resolutions. [img]smile.gif[/img]

You are also absolutely right about a reaction to an attack on Israel, but the comparison of the two doesn't work. An unprovoked attack against Israel would almost certainly be deemed wrong, but the issue in question is whether the attack against Iraq was legal or not, and the truth is, it was based on the conditions of the ceasefire.

Maybe not ethical, but you'd think Kofi should know it was legal, regardless of what he said, but then again, we don't know what legal advise he may have given his son regarding the Iraqi Oil For Food Program either.

I just wonder why he's waited until two months before the US elections, and 4 months before the Iraqi elections, to make his complaint public?

[ 09-16-2004, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Oblivion437]

Not to derail the thread, but I'm pro-Israel...

As I see it, various countries decided to be complete smartasses towards the UN. They failed. Others piggybacked on. Israel kicked the stuffing out of all of them like a Plug Ugly in a fight with half-a-dozen Bowery Boys.

Every partition, such as the Gaza strip, is purely Israeli generosity. Their enemies should have been thankful they didn't vent latent Holocaust angst on their anti-Semitic hides back in '67.

[John D Harris]

So somebody declares the war in Iraq illegal? What are they willing to do about it? 12 years and lots of resolutions? Wake me up when their fleets are on the way.

If any country has the guts to attack Israel I say let them, but don't come crying to me when they get their collective rear-ends kicked.

[Memnoch]

Originally posted by Morgeruat: not quite sure what you're saying there... <-- dense... are you saying that substituting words doesn't clear one from the negativity of implied swearing, which is what would lead to the unplanned vacation from posting?

What I'm saying is that if you went and called someone a "bloody [memnoch] useless son of a [memnoch] and you can kiss my [memnoch] and I'll see you in [memnoch] before I'll agree with you" you'll still be taking a break. It's the implication, not the [memnoch] words. Kapish?

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Memnoch: ]What I'm saying is that if you went and called someone a "bloody [memnoch] useless son of a [memnoch] and you can kiss my [memnoch] and I'll see you in [memnoch] before I'll agree with you" you'll still be taking a break. It's the implication, not the [memnoch] words. Kapish?

Ah, gotcha, I was trying to keep my language family friendly (as it has been said numnerous times, this is a family forum (well, perhaps the CE forum less than the others, but that's due to the nature of what's being discussed, and a 13 y/o looking for morrowind help is less likely to be interested in international politics than how to beat boss X, Y, and Z) anyway your point is well taken, and I'll let this thread get back to the original topic which is fascinating to read the points of view (even if I have little to contribute that hasn't already been added).

[img]graemlins/elf.gif[/img]