The Crazy Write Winger

 
Subscribe to The Crazy Write Winger
 

Monday, March 17, 2003

 
The British Attorney-General declares war on Iraq legal...

British papers are reporting that British Attroney-General Lord Goldsmith has issued a written parliamentary statement that war on Iraq is legal based on existing U.N. resolutions, something I've alreay pointed out. The best description I can find so far is from the UK Guardian Online.

And, of course, anti-war liberals are trying to say that Resolutions 678, 687, and 1441 didn't really say what they said.

I'm going to repost my comments earlier. Read them for yourselves and decide:

Anti-war pundits are going on and on about how a war with Iraq would not be justified without an affirmative vote from the U.N. They claim the U.N. has not authorized the use of "all means necessary," and thus has not given the green light for an invasion. They couldn't be more wrong.

In 1990, the U.N. passed resolution 678, which stated the following:

[The Security Council] authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless 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 resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.


The resolution was passed 12-2, with Cuba and Yemen voting against and China abstaining. Why is this important? Let us now read from Security Council Resolution 1441, passed last fall by a unanimous vote:

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990).

(emphasis mine)


In other words, if Iraq doesn't adhere to any resolution passed subsequent to 660, then Member States are free to use military force to rectify the matter. Thus, Security Council Resolutions 1441 and 678 have already given the U.S. all the authorization it needs.

If resolution 1441 was never meant to include the use of "all means necessary," that is, the use of force, then why does it very explicitly mention resolution 678, especially noting the part about using all means necessary?

"Today's report confirms that, despite White House scare tactics, Social Security remains sound for decades to come.."

-? Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (NV) upon hearing reports that the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds will go bankrupt even earlier than predicted.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?