On 2 Aug 2002 at 0:12, Blunderov wrote:
> Joe Dees wrote:
> No, the justifications for deposing the Iraqi regime were clearly laid
> previously (six separate points, I believe).
> Almost I don't believe what I'm seeing. I don't care if there are a
> hundred points written in Beelzebub's own personal ink. There is no
> justification in international law for deposing a regime you don't like,
> no matter how emphatically you may disapprove of it. Bush is simply
> inventing a pretext in the time honored fashion of warmongers
Or no matter what it does? Such as attacking their neighbors, creating
chemical weapons they use against those neighbors and against their
own people, and attempting to assassinate a former US president
(among other things)? No reason WHATSOEVER????? You
apparently must then, by following your own statement to its logical
conclusion, disapprove of the deposing of the Taliban, Hitler, Duvalier,
Idi Amin, and Pol Pot. You have little company.
> How is this splendid indifference to international law different from
> Islamic, or any other, extremism?
It is in response to an expansionist and fascist extremism, rather than
itself being same. When the US goes in to protect its interests and
those of its allies, it leaves when the job is done (and sometimes,
regrettably, too soon). Saddam was planning to seize Kuwait (and most
probably the entire Arabian peninsula) for the duration.
> I have no doubt that any feebleness in the legal rationale will be
> satisfactorily obscured by gunfire, much as is the case in Israel.
The rationale IS gunfire (Saddam's), and his continuing attempt to
augment same with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, which he
would most certainly use, as he has used chemical weapons already
agaist his own people and against those of other countries.
> This is horrible. The next thing the whole world will be in flames.
No, just one mustachioed madman's crazed ambitions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:17 MDT