[strela]

"May you live in interesting times."

Well, I believe these events qualify as such. What a great (and scary) time it is to be a news junkie.

[Sloth]

If the resolution is defeated, an attack against Iraq would violate international law.

Stated as fact... AP sucks.

[steveegg]

So when does the frog boil start?

[Cicero]

If the resolution is defeated, an attack against Iraq would violate international law.

Says who? Edith M. Lederer?

International law, if it means anything, can be defined in one of three ways. 1) It's a matter of sovereignty. He who has the power makes the rules. 2) It's a matter of consensus. It's international law if everyone agrees that it is. 3) It's a matter of Natural Law. This is the correct answer according to traditional belief, but the problem is that very few people in positions of authority believe in natural law any longer.

So. We're back to power and consensus. The U.S. has the power, and it doesn't consent to have the UN tell it not to defend itself. Plus, natural law is on our side as well, because natural law includes the rights of self defense and just war against an aggressor.

[LurkedLongEnough]

[longtermmemmory]

This is a french manuver. It is a way for them to say, "see we could have done this peacefully but the cowboy americans did not wait."

Since the french leak like a sink, I wonder if the war will start the second the diplomacy ends. Thus the french can add fuel to the antiamerican fires with complaints about mr. blix's efforts being curtailed against the will of the UN.

As weird as this sounds, I do not believe the UN should be trusted with a post war iraq.

[William McKinley]

France called for an emergency U.N. ministerial meeting Tuesday

The war may already be over by then, Jaques.

[Kay Soze]

French delegates assembled