UN gives warning to US and Britain

UK Telegraph ^ | April 8, 2003 | UK Telegraph

[GreyWolf]

How many divisions does the U.N. have?

One. They're all French and they wear pink pantiloons!

[jdege]

Of course Iraq isn't a treasure to be divied upon among the conquerors. It's going to be given back to the Iraqis.

Which is why we won't let the UN's "humanitarian mafia" get its grubby hands on it.

[razbinn]

U N =

i r r e l e v e n t

God Bless america

[FairOpinion]

"So exactly what would they recognize as the Iraqi government?"
-----

I can tell you exactly: a COMMUNIST government, which is a French puppet. They see it as a great opportunity to promote communism, while plundering the Iraqi's oil, and leaving the Iraqis in squalor. (France has a real sweetheart oil deal with Saddam, which will now become null and void).

One of the insightful posters here said that France would just want to suck them dry, and it's so true.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Screw the UN. They have already proved that they have no teeth and no guts to do anything about any of their "warnings". HAHA!

[ApesForEvolution]

I guess it's time to declare all out warfare against the irrelevant and defunct world governing body calling itself the United Nations. That's as nice as I can put it.

[jriemer]

UN Vulture Alert!

[steve-b]

UN gives warning to US and Britain

Now, go away, or I shall warn you a second time!

[fightinJAG]

Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

Yup. When the UN gets around to "sternly warning" Iraq for its ongoing war crimes, it can start to think about warning us about our rights and obligations.

The only truly successful reconstructions in history were administered by the U.S. and her allies.

[TheBigB]

If the US went ahead with an interim administration without Security Council backing, there would be "real difficulty in the extent to which other countries would be prepared to recognise this group as anything other than an offshoot or a branch of the military occupation in Iraq

I think there's a threat in there, but it's obscured by so much mealy-mouthed UN bullschlitz it's hard to tell. Can someone clarify?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

We better be careful. They might hold a meeting.

[biblewonk]

UN under-secretary general Shashi Tharoor said the Allies had no rights under international law to engage in any kind of reconstruction or creation of government without the express consent of the Security Council.

Might makes right!

International law is about as valid as gay marriage. It is a joke and a mockery of real law and real marriage. Both are disgarded at the first disagreement.

[Redwood71]

Actually, this might be a real good opportunity for Europe to right itself with the money they owe us from WWI and WWII. If we take their share out of the existing gains, they might get close to being even. As for France, they still owe us more than that considering we have bailed their back sides out more. I can spell Vietnam, I was there and know when France bailed and left it to us. Seems to me they will still be short a bundle.

[ApesForEvolution]

We don't need nor should we even think about taking part in another world government, sovereignty-usurping mass of diplomats in any way, shape or form. When the needs arise, a coalition of nations will come together and do the right thing. As evidenced in Iraq.

[Momto2]

"We better be careful. They might hold a meeting. " OOOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!! NOT THAT >>>>>>> ANYTHING BUT THAT....... What will we do??? What if they (SHUDDER) Pass a Resolution?????

[ThomasMore]

Amen to that!

[ConservativeConvert]

Today is Goofi The Clown's 65th birthday...what would you like to give him?

[richardtavor]

Let them pass a resolution; that will certainly scare us to death!

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

"BITE ME!!!"

B, Well said! Peace and love, George.