No, the cease fire was negotiated by Schwarzkopf and signed by the leaders of the coatlition. It was up to the coalition to patrol the no-fly zones and it was they who were fired upon, negating the cease-fire.
You seem to have a real love for the UN, when they have constantly proven themselves to be worthless. Face it, as has been shown, Russia, France and Germany had too much to lose to allow war in Iraq to happen. They didn't give a rats ass about our security. You may want to surrender our sovreignity to the UN, but I don't.
A classic ad hominem. I have no respect for the UN as it is currently comprised. They want to disarm the world so we will all be at the mercy of any terrorist government that comes along. That is just like the gun control nuts on the American left.
Nevertheless, I like that one provision of the charter. I fits with my moral view of what is right and wrong. One does not initiate force, start a fight, strike the first blow without a truly IMMINENT threat. If it is hard to get a force resolution through the Security Council, that is good. I really believe what Bush and company said but did not mean. War must absolutely be the LAST resort to resolve any problem and every obstacle to war is good.
If your memory recorders were on during the first quarter of 2003, you saw clearly that Bush was determined to have a war and nothing was going to stop him. There was no possibility of a peaceful settlement.