The Iraq War retrospective Thread

[kandrathe]

How ambiguous is the idea that a UN resolution is enforced by the UN security council, and not by whoever decides they have the authority to play global sheriff? The charter is abundantly clear on this point.

Although, Res 1441 is unclear as to when, who, and how a material breech is determined, and then whom would deliver the serious consequences. You read that to mean that Res. 1441 was meaningless drivel, and the Bush administration read that to mean that Saddam continued frustration of weapons inspections and lack of cooperation, not meeting deadlines and obfuscation was a material breach. They also presented this point at the security council when trying to get the UN to commit to having a spine and following though on its "threat" of "serious consequences". They did not. The US made its case on how Iraq was threatening them (true threat or not, they made the case), and then acted in accordance with the UN charter to defend themselves from the percieved hostile threat. I would add, the only thing scarier than an illegal war, is a legal one. It reminds me of the Vatican's decrees on just and unjust war.

War is the result of failed politics.