The war on Iraq is illegal under our own laws because it was not authorized by Congress with a "Declaration of War" according to the Constitution. Congressman Ron Paul tried to make the Iraq Resolution a Declaration of War, (or nothing), but Tom Lantos, (my opponent), called Ron Paul's motion "frivolous" and used his clout to defeat it in committee. Lantos, though a Democrat, then pushed the Iraq Resolution through the House for George Bush.
The Iraq Resolution authorized military action if necessary to enforce UN resolutions which had not been written yet. The UN then passed a resolution for inspections, Res 1441, which did NOT authorize war. The US Ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, stood in front of the cameras immediately after 1441 passed, stating clearly, (as he previously agreed with the Security Council to do), that the resolution "contains no trigger for war." Lacking a resolution for war, George Bush counted on the inspectors finding WMD so he could get one. At the UN he called this the "2 resolution process". Of course, no WMD turned up, the Iraqis were surprisingly cooperative, and international community started discussing ending sanctions, instead of bombing Iraq. France and Russia announced they would veto any resolution for war, if necessary. We citizens were told to start refering to French fries as "freedom fries". Then George Bush attacked Iraq 46 hours after Saddam Hussein refused to leave his own country on 48 hours notice. Harland Harrison LPSM San Mateo CA on 6/23/06 1:13 AM, John Stroebel at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > far too vague to answer vic. Which International laws are you speaking of? > > On 6/22/06, Vic Cinc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> kiddleddee [EMAIL PROTECTED] <kiddleddee%40yahoo.com>] wrote: >>> --- In [email protected] <Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com>, Vic >> Cinc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> kiddleddee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've already done that, boyd, in another post, but here it is >>> again. >>>>> The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are illegal (under US and >>>>> international law), >>>> >>>> and pray tell who is going to enforce this "international law"? I >>> dont >>>> see swat bursting through the white house windows any times soon , >>> so I >>>> really dont think that its an illegal war. >>>> >>>> the notions of wars being legal and illegal is kind of rather bizzar >>>> really. whats a legal war look like? is there some traffic cop in >>> the >>>> middle saying "ok you are clear to invade now"? >>>> >>>> Vic >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> >>> That's the problem with uber-statists (and other liberals). Concepts >>> like "legal" and "illegal" (and "right" and "wrong") are meaningless >>> for them unless there is some violent authority around to "enforce" >>> them. >>> >>> Actually the notion of legal and illegal war is not at all bizarre; >>> no more so than the notion of personal self-defense and agressive >>> violence. >> >> laws have little meaning if no one can enforce them. so I am still >> waiting for you to tell me who is going to enforce international law? >> >> Vic >> >> >> > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
