U.N. Panel Rejects Bush Stance on Military Action

[Rose Siding]

An influential U.N.-appointed panel challenged the Bush administration's right to use military force against an enemy that does not pose an imminent military threat. The 16-member panel, which was appointed by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, said in a long-awaited report that only the U.N. Security Council has the legal standing to authorize such a "preventive war."

The panel's findings reflect persistent international unease over the U.S. invasion of Iraq last year without an explicit council endorsement, noting that "there is little evident international acceptance of the idea of security being best preserved by a balance of power, or by any single -- even benignly motivated -- superpower." It also recommends the establishment of five guidelines that must be met before force can be legitimately used -- including a determination that force is used as a last resort and that the threat is serious.

"If there are good arguments for preventive military action, with good evidence to support them, they should be put to the Security Council," the report said. But "in a world full of perceived potential threats, the risk of the global order . . . is simply too great for the legality of unilateral preventive action . . . to be accepted."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23416-2004Nov30.html?nav=rss_politics

[NVMojo]

1. so there you spoiled *, assassin of children, the elderly and everyone

in between...

[NYC Liberal]

3. Don't forget frogs!

Oh, and that's "**" ;)

[sundancekid]

2. imagine that -- we have to act like a COMMUNITY of nations in the world!

[NYC Liberal]

4. Next thing you know, we'll have to follow the LAW!

Yikes!

[Ian David]

5. OooOooh.... a "global test"

So, when do they institute sanctions against us?

[Sparkly]

7. Not the dreaded "permission slip!"

We can't have that!

[LynnTheDem]

6. Cool...the same thing the US Constitution says

America can wage war for self-defense of imminent attack, or through a signed treaty such as the UN.

The UN says war may be waged in ONLY 2 instances; self-defense from imminent attack, or with SC approval.

Invading Iraq most certainly was not "self defense", especially with bush & Cartel busy denying they ever called Iraq an imminent threat, only a FUTURE threat.

And it certainly wasn't with SC approval.

ILLEGAL WAR OF AGGRESSION; what the Nuremburg Tribunal called "the worst of all crimes". Such MORAL VALUES the rightwingnuts hold.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

8. I wonder if

Shrub will even bother publicly thumbing his nose at this or just ignore it all together. After all, we don't need anyone’s permission to behave like savages in the mighty US.

[Pluvious]

9. But but... Boosh said to the UN...

"We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace."
-Bush to United Nations, Sept. 2004

[Rose Siding]

10. Did he really say that?

I'm glad I missed it. What a maniac! If he wasn't giggling at the time, he's deluded for not recognizing his own behavior.

[Pluvious]

11. Yup... The mind doth boggle

I only read the transcript, so missed seeing the incredulous reaction of the listening.

How far from reality must they think we've all wondered off to ?

______________
"What I really like about the President is his wonderfully uncluttered mind."
-Tony Blair