Re: IRAQ: Why a new Resolution is NEEDED.

From: Party of Citizens (citizens@vcn.bc.ca)
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 13:54:04 MST

  • Next message: Brett Paatsch: "On UN Amendments. (was Re: IRAQ: Why a new Resolution is NEEDED.)"

    U-S-A suffers from delusions of grandeur. Western Europe is a larger
    economic unit than U-S-A. The world without U-S-A makes everything it
    needs from paper clips to rockets which take us into space. U-S-A is
    Canada's biggest trading partner but if U-S-A were to drop into a black
    hole in space tomorrow, Canada would suffer economically for only a few
    years as it can trade quite well with Asia (another economic bloc as big
    as U-S-A) and Europe. Also Canada is bigger in area than our neighbour to
    the south and would quickly become the "New West".

    Right now, El Moron is frightening, if not terrorising the world with his
    war-mongering evil-doer ways. As long as the UN maintains a strong
    presence in Iraq, there is no threat of war with Iraq's neighbours. UN
    peacekeepers have stayed for decades in other parts of the world. Why not
    Iraq? How should the UN pay for the peacekeepers? By selling enough Iraqi
    oil. If the UN force costs in the billions, so be it. Iraq will pay and
    the peace will be maintained. There is no need for time limits on Iraq.
    The most they have is a few box cars of biological and chemical agents
    buried in the desert. Agents the use of which would be suicidal as long as
    UN has a presence.

    El Moron is a terrorist thug who threatens to destabilize the Gulf region
    and the world with a war which has UNKNOWN CONSEQUENCES (a point raised by
    Madelaine Albright recently on CNN). Keeping the UN peacekeepers there in
    place of El Moron's blood-lusting alternative has KNOWN CONSEQUENCES, ie
    the consequences of PEACE.

    Yes we need a new resolution...a resolution for peace.

    POC

    On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Kai Becker wrote:

    > Am Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2003 08:19 schrieb Wei Dai:
    > > BTW, isn't the U.S. already in breach of the U.N. charter by enforcing
    > > the no-fly zones, which were never authorized by the Security Council?
    > > What about the 1989 Panama invasion, which was not authorized by the
    > > Security Council either?
    >
    > Yes, we should start to think about invading the USA and establish a
    > government that obeys international law. There's even enough evidence
    > (i.e. evidence of Mr. Powell's standards) that the US still has
    > biological WMDs (which they are not allowed to have) and they are
    > actively developing new weapons - land mines - that are forbidden IIRC.
    > Hey, how much cheap oil would _that_ give :-)
    >
    > Kai
    >
    > --
    > == Kai M. Becker == kmb@kai-m-becker.de == Bremen, Germany ==
    > "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced"



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 26 2003 - 14:00:52 MST