nobody wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
But most of the civilized world rejected the
claims of WMD in Iraq? I don't
recall those claims. Please cite them.

Amazing how americans have been so misinformed.
It is sad.

The whole world knows that Hussein, when asked
by the UN in september 2002,
had agreed to give Blix full and unfethered
access again. Then, the USA
blocked the UN from starting inspections until
a new resolution was signed.
The USA intended to have a resolution which
granted it the right to invade,
but had to settle for 1441 which required another
resolution should the UN
decide that Iraq was not complying.

Problem is that Iraq was complying and the world
could not justify declaring
Iraq in breach, while the USA was in a hurry
to invade.

On the other side, everyone outside the Bliar
and Bush regimes knew that the
"dossiers" presented by these two cohorts were
quite questionable. (remember
that one important document was aactually just
an assignement done by some
student at university years before and was no
longer current). In fact, had
you bothered to read the Bliar documents (which
had been made available on the
british government's website, you would have
seen that all of the evidence
actually dated before the UN started the inspections
process after the Kuwait invasion.

Then came confirmation from both Blix and Baradei
that the so called USA
evidenne was fabricated in some cases or pointed
to site which had not shown
any signs of WMDs.

This is why the UN in early 2003 refused to
give the USA a resolution which
would have granted the USA the right to invade.
When 3 of 5 permanent
security council member threathen to use their
veto, it means that the USA and
Britain are really attempting to do something
which is wrong. Yes, the
citizens of the USA remained blind to the reality
and supported their regime.
At least the citizens of the UK saw through
the lies of Bliar and protested
vehemently against. (so did spanich, polish
and australian citizens who could
not understand why their governement would have
caved in to USA demands/blackmail/bribes.
If you think the UN is a government, you are unfortunately mistaken. The
UN only has as much power as its members are willing to grant (or not to,
as the case may be). Not a single government leader in any country is going
to take the political risk (let alone the risk to their lives) and give the
UN powers of government. In some countries, any politician who suggests such
a thing is voted out. In others, the masses take to the streets and toss
the *******s out. In still other countries, the military gets involved and
the tanks roll to the Presidential Palace and the Generals are now in charge
(like it or not). Bottom line: don't expect the UN to become a government
anytime soon. If you think otherwise, then I have beachfront property in
Arizona to sell you.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!