On Wed, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:56 PM, M.B. Jr. wrote:
there is absolutely no sense in evoking 1990's UN-authorized action...
You can stop right there M.B.
You claim there was no sense in evoking [sic] the UN's authorization of
1990?
That you appear to not understand what the words "Cease Fire" means is your
problem, not mine. Saddam had obligations and failed to meet them. Period.
Neither your understanding nor your approval is required.
==================================================================
On Wed, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:08 PM, "security concern" wrote:
Sorry to inject some real truth here, guys.
...the then UN Secretary General, Mr. Kofi Annan (referring to the 2003
Iraq invasion) >termed the invasion 'illegal'.
Two points:
a) It's been my experience that people who claim to be speaking "real
truth" are generally as full of crap as a Christmas Goose. It's almost as
cliched and ridiculous as "speaking truth to power".
b) The notion that you would hold forth a man who was up to his neck in the
United Nations "Oil for Food" scandal as an arbiter of legality is absurd
to the point of surrealism. MC Escher himself would feel compelled to roll
his eyes and say; "Niggah Please".
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com ? Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft®
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
