Justifiable War?

[grimm]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 31 2005, 07:22 AM
Sorry , allow me to return to topic.

Some facts.... (I know how MikeAI hates them )

UK Attorney General , Lord Goldsmith ,Advises Blair of the possible illegality of invading Iraq.

"""36. Finally, I must stress that the lawfulness of military action depends not only on the existence of a legal basis, but also on the question of proportionality. Any force used pursuant to the authorisation in resolution 678 (whether or not there is a second resolution):


must have as its objective the enforcement the terms of the cease-fire contained in resolution 687 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions;
be limited to what is necessary to achieve that objective; and
must be a proportionate response to that objective, ie securing compliance with Iraq's disarmament obligations.
That is not to say that action may not be taken to remove Saddam Hussein from power if it can be demonstrated that such action is a necessary and proportionate measure to secure the disarmament of Iraq. But regime change cannot be the objective of military action. This should be borne in mind in considering the list of military targets and in making public statements about any campaign.

(signed) ATTORNEY GENERAL 7 March 2003 """"


In hindsight the US/UK conducted the invasion in a manner in which in the opinion of the British Attorney General was illegal.

again, nick, the point being? its not as if Americans don't know these things. But that is no reason to pull out of what has become a successful endeavor, no matter how it started. making arguments against the current campaign based on its original merits is the same thing as arguing that we should stop in the intersection because we ran a stop light.