DU Archive (Jan-27-2003): With UN approval, would you support military action?

[David__77]

Jan-27-2003 - Subject of thread: "There is currently a divide among critics of the Bush war drive. Some remain opposed to military action against Iraq, regardless of what UN inspectors say, or what resolution is or is not passed by the UN Security Council. Others, including the leaders of Germany and France, have stated that war is the last, least desirable option, but an option nonetheless, presumably if 'circumstances change.'"

"If Hans Blix gave up on the possibility of progress via inspections, and the UN Security Council were to pass a resolution approving forceful, military measures, would you support such action, perhaps support it, or definitely oppose it? This is a valid question, especially if the momentum of the anti-war movement is not to be side-tracked by diplomatic or other setbacks."

http://tinyurl.com/4djn9y7

Or the original link, which appears to not be working at the moment: http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID60/31305.html

(I thought this was interesting - if self-referential - material for the current debate regarding foreign intervention by the United States. The many responses are very interesting.)

[gateley]

1. Link's not working?

I'm looking forward to seeing if the comments then were as heated and divisive as they are now.

[David__77]

2. Hmm it works for me... try this.

http://tinyurl.com/48b2h9p

Also, a right-winger was fuming about that thread here: http://rightwingnews.com/archives/000592.PHP

[gateley]

7. First one didn't work, second one did. Obviously me. I'll keep trying - thanks!! nt

[Unvanguard]

3. The involvement of the UN in Libya makes some difference, but is not the entirety of the difference.

I would have opposed Iraq with or without UN support. Had the Libya intervention been done with NATO, but blocked in the Security Council by Russia and China, I would probably be somewhat more reluctant to support it, but would probably support it anyway.

[CJCRANE]

4. If there was no proof of WMD I would still oppose it. nt

[David__77]

5. Yes.

I do agree with what you say. At the time, I could not fathom Blix actually stating such a thing and so didn't even go there. But there was a real possibility of a UN resolution, and I sensed there was a divide on that question.

[CJCRANE]

8. Okay, well I just edited my post but the point remains similar.

(Didn't know you'd replied).

[David__77]

6. Dupe.

..

[gateley]

9. I believed what we were being told because I wasn't paying attention (obviously) -

even though I hated Bush and didn't trust him, when you don't pay attention, you assume that others who are are on top of it. Boy, am I whistling a different tune now.

[CJCRANE]

10. One thing I have to admit in this Iraq/Libya debate

is that for me the Libya intervention is more personal (it's an emotional response).

I don't want Gaddafi to win, I want the underdogs to win, I felt for them when the tide turned against them.