The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #57846   Message #912152
Posted By: Forum Lurker
17-Mar-03 - 07:10 PM
Thread Name: BS: Should Saddam comply with Resolutions?
Subject: RE: BS: Should Saddam comply with Resolutions?
JtS-Article 40 means that the UN will not, for example, call upon India to relinquish its claims to Kashmir to avoid conflict with Pakistan, even as a temporary measure. Neither the U.S. nor Britain have any "right to engage Iraq" that a cease-fire order would compromise. Article 51 is meant to allow countries to engage in actual self-defense. When occupying forces are given warning shots, that in no way is a threat to the national security of the occupiers, and is thus not a valid case of self-defense. Until the UN declares the cease-fire invalid, the U.S. and U.K. cannot resume offensive operations legally.