The violation of a cease fire is means to take action to bring the country into agreement with the ceasefire agreements, not to invade said country.Originally posted by Rooster
"When Bush went to war he backstabbed every ally of his that is against war, he backstabbed the sanctity of every country who believes in international law, every country that believes in the sanctity of the UN."
This is quite hilarious. The UN made itself irrelevent, the US had no need to help it along that path. It refused to back up its own resolutions (not proposed resolutions, actual resolutions passed and unvetoed) and thus made itself into the world's largest, and most overpaid debating society. Iraq violated the terms of its 1991 ceasefire. This was never in question. 1441 proves it was never in question. You foam at the mouth about illegal wars. I'm sorry to break it to you, but the violation of a ceasefire agreement is a very legal method for waging a war. President Bush backstabbed no one in the procescution of this war. This was no sneak attack. This was an opperation perfectly legal by the standards of international law (if such a thing ever existed without the US enforcing it). I'm not accusing Germany or Russia of the same things I'm accusing France of. France deliberately tried to use any method, including sending diplomats to swing vote countries to try to railroad them into voting with the french. That is not the actions of an ally.
France can burn, and I will laugh. As far as I'm concerned it no longer even exists. Its a shame some of my great uncles had to die in such a worthless place.
The US sent diplomats to foreign countries bribing them with oil conessions and such after the war in order to look like it was in the plus on this matter.
Do you think that the Genevea accords or the Gulf of Tonkein Resolutions, or the SEATO pact also gave us power to go into Veitnam.
It is a shame you are as ignorant about this as you are, you are so filled with hate that you can not see what is in front of you.