(Yawn)

There werea multitude of reasons to go to war.
First among them was no compliance with terms for
our ceasing conflict in the first one.


Those terms were set by the U.N. and it was up to the U.N. to determine
if
the
violation of those terms was cause for military action. It is not OK
for
the
U.S. or any other nation to unilaterally decide that a U.N. resolution
has
been
violated and take military action based on said U.N. resolution.

Uh, no

No what? The terms of the U.N. resolutions were not set by the U.N.?
It is not up to the U.N. to determine whether or not the violation of U.N.
resolutions are grounds for military action?
Or no to the notion that it is not O.K. for the U.S. or any other nation
to
unilaterally decide that a U.N. resolution has been violated and take
military
action based on said U.N. resolution?

Being that there are five permananet members of the security council, and
that being they are among the most powerful countries in the world, and
being that they often don't get on well with eachother and have numerous
competeing interests, it is nearly impossible to get a unanimous vote. Any
one member could stop enforcement of a UN resolution, thus making such
resolutions just a bunch of hot air, that need not be respected and carry
little weight. Besides, dealing with completeing the end of the 1991 war
is a US matter, as well as smacking them for targeting and shooting
at our aircraft.


How do any of these facts and opinions of yours conflict with my claims? It was
my claims to which you said "Uh,no."