The actual purpose of the UN

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=4/24/2004&Cat=14&Num=001

To commit a crime against peace, one must engage in planning, preparation, initiation or waging of war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties . . . or participation in a common plan or conspiracy . . . to wage an aggressive war. Bush is guilty on all these counts. The most damning evidence coming not from the liberal left, but in a series of well-documented books providing revelations by people in his own administration or party. Now, with Woodward's work, the President is condemned with his own words.

Iraq (WMD programs), North Korea (constant testing missiles near Japan and the building of Nukes), Iran (building of nukes), Libya (WMD's and working on Nukes), Pakistan and India both fall in this group for constantly trying to engage in a war against each other. Know I have learned that the US falls in this group, because we attacked some one else in this group. Wait a minute was not the US enforcing the laws the rest of the world has agreed upon.


Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometers, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,

..................
further down
..................

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual declarations, the Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the Council, not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other delivery systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on aircraft, including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological, and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to weapon production or material;



http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm

The UN (self proclaimed policeman of the world) decided that Iraq should disarm, Iraq did not disarm. The UN was also unwilling to use force. Just because the group responsible for enforcing the law fails, does not mean the law does not exist. While America acted with others to enforce the law the UN passed, America still acted outside legal process. You can't accuse America of war crimes, but you can accuse America of being a vigilante. When the police fail to protect, you only have yourself to rely on. (At least that is the way it works in America. I don't know how it works in the rest of the world.)

Bush would be hard pressed before any tribunal, short of a Texas kangaroo court, to establish that the Iraqi military was an imminent threat to the U.S. Iraq was a defeated, heavily impoverished nation, under economic sanctions and restricted by U.S.-enforced no-fly zones in both its north and south.

First off those were US, Britain and France no fly zones, not just American no fly zones. Secondly, Iraq was attacked because it was a threat and because of the fact Iraq was not disarming. The last reason is enough for me to justify attacking a country. When the UN says something in the area of worldwide security, it needs to have teeth. It just so happens that America is the blood and guts that carry the teeth.

To allow counties who have violated UN rules and regulations to escape punishment from the UN will put the world in a epic worldwide battle cycle, or at least set the stage for serious regional conflicts like Gulf War 1.

cube