U.N. law is not U.S. law
Posted By: ??? on 2006-06-09
In Reply to: 1. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution - Kelly
and given the state of the U.N. right this moment their sovereignty dubious at best.
Anyhow, we have to the protect the U.S. FIRST...and that means in security and sovereignty. We go into wars with the U.S. in mind first, although we do our best to minimize the stress on the rest of the world, and we also have made life better for countless millions in the process--the French, the Germans, the Japanese, much of the Soviet bloc. I could go on. Do innocents get killed? Sure they do. It's a grim fact of war, but calculate that against how many innocents would have died if had not invaded Iraq (and other countries in the past) there's no question in most of our operations we have done the right thing.
Your constitutional reference is weak at best. We have NEVER excluded the necessity/possibility of pre-emptive war in some cases. We go WAYYYY out of our way to avoid it. In the mid-1990s President Clinton himself was talking about the very real possibility of having to invade Iraq to take Saddam out that is why Hillary can do nothing but stand by this war now, because he knows that her husband advocated the EXACT same thing that Bush actually did (along with numerous Democratic and Republican senators). To say we prematurely went into this war is naive at best and a downright untruth at worst.
Again, someone can have the opinion that this war (or any war for that matter) is immoral, but illegal, that would not stand up in any international court, not that we would let ourselves be put on trial in international courts, and definitely would not hold up in any U.S. court.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
|
