Debate : 18872


Off-Topic / Debate / 18872	18871 \| 18873

Subject:	Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Thu, 6 Feb 2003 19:13:37 GMT
Viewed:	425 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> > > When Iraq is foound in breach of 1441, should the US invade? Should there > > be a resolution from the UN stating that war is imminent? Or should there > > be a resolution laying out a way to go in and peacably disarm Iraq? > > Do you truly, realistically believe the latter can be accomplished? > > -->Bruce<-- In my honest opinion--no--which is sad. But any force that invades Iraq should be under a mandate by a united coalition, not by the US. My prayers, however, are for peace. Dave K

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
(...) Okay, I was just trying to force a reality check. Perhaps there is some other avenue open rather than war. (...) I don't see why it would be to the United States' advantage to have it any other way. This threatened unilateral action is a load (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
(...) This is absolutely correct (at least from the legalistic viewpoint). If the UN is to have any credibility, it must enforce its sanctions. If its sanctions are worthless, then the UN loses stature and encourages unilateral action. What the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

69 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search