OT; afghan war illegal?

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

(Iraq round two)
International law
Further information: United Nations Charter and International law

'[/i\\i]There have been no findings by any legal tribunal with both legal authority and legal jurisdiction that any laws were violated. There are only two legal tribunals with both authority and jurisdiction to make such a finding: (1) The US federal courts and (2) the United Nations. Advisory opinions are prohibited in US Courts and are also prohibited by the UN Charter unless the security council authorizes them. There are no relevant advisory opinions or legal finding regarding the legality. The United Nations security council has made no findings on the issues.

lets be serious here, even assuming Iraq WAS illegal ...

(1) The US federal courts

... and this US court action against the US Bush administration was going to be prosecuted by what part of the US government ????

(2) the United Nations. Advisory opinions are prohibited in US Courts and are also prohibited by the UN Charter unless the security council authorizes them.

uh huh ... and the US has absolute veto power in the security council.

[raaaid]

the truth is we live in an anarchy in which the strongest imposes the rules, lets not decieve ourselves

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

lets be serious here, even assuming Iraq WAS illegal ...

That's right... some assume it was illegal

If Saddam trading in Euro had of strengthened OPEC to do the same, like Iran was promising not that long ago by and subsequently declining opening her own bourse (there's a hint there of what is going on there with the sabre rattling and sanctions), the USD would almost certainly have crashed overnight.
Illegal? no... immoral,? possibly... to defend, even pre-emptively against an economic warfare?
Iraq is the perfect setting to convince OPEC not to go that route.. especially with the US pulling her base out of Saudi.
Crashing a country's economy, could quite easily and without hestitation be called an act of terrorism
Keep in mind though, that Iraq round one, ended in a conditional ceasefire. Open inspections were part of that condition.


@bugmenot... you can bet your bottom doller though, that if the (US) Democrats thought there was even the slightest chance to nail The Republicans over it, they would have.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

That's right... some assume it was illegal

If Saddam trading in Euro had of strengthened OPEC to do the same, like Iran was promising not that long ago by and subsequently declining opening her own bourse (there's a hint there of what is going on there with the sabre rattling and sanctions), the USD would almost certainly have crashed overnight.
Illegal? no... immoral,? possibly... to defend, even pre-emptively against an economic warfare?
Iraq is the perfect setting to convince OPEC not to go that route.. especially with the US pulling her base out of Saudi.
Crashing a country's economy, could quite easily and without hestitation be called an act of terrorism
Keep in mind though, that Iraq round one, ended in a conditional ceasefire. Open inspections were part of that condition.


@bugmenot... you can bet your bottom doller though, that if the (US) Democrats thought there was even the slightest chance to nail The Republicans over it, they would have.

you call it pre-emptive war, some call it speculation. It's very dangerous to assume we (as in "the Western world") are always right.

For once I agree with Raaaid when he says: "the truth is we live in an anarchy in which the strongest imposes the rules, lets not deceive ourselves".