ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

There was no UN approval for the Iraq war.

Tickers | 05/06/08

yes there was, and resolutions before the whole thing to back up US actions (ambiguously, I concede)

KittyCatRep | 05/06/08

care to imput your argument LiveForReason? I would like to finish this.

KittyCatRep | 05/06/08

since when has the UN approved any war, besides Korea where China's seat was given to Taiwan and the Soviet Union abstained out of protest.

MorgMcA | 05/06/08

KittyCatRep, a little history lesson... United Nations Security Council Resolution 678, passed on November 29, 1990 authorizes "member states co-operating with the Government of Kuwait...to use all necessary means" to (1) implement Security Council Resolution 660 and other resolutions calling for the end of Iraq's occupation of Kuwait and withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwaiti territory and (2) "restore international peace and security in the area." Since that time, no subsequent resolution has officially ended the original call to action. However, realistic events and situations essentially rendered that resolution inapplicable. This is evident considering that there has been little to no reason for action until the invasion in 2003. In the prelude to the 2003 invasion, attempts by then Secretary of State Colin Powell to convince the Security Council to take action were highly publicized and yet ultimately failed (Do you not remember the "Freedom Fries" episode referring to French refusal to invade?). In his argument, Powell used Security Council Resolution 1441 as a foundation for his argument that since Iraq not in compliance with IAEA weapons inspections, there were grounds for invasion. This was an argument that did not convince the other P-5 members that military action was necessary. Eventually, the Security Council did approve of the invasion of Iraq. However, this did not occur until after the United States had already invaded on March 20, 2003. Passed on May 22nd, 2003, UNSC resolution 1483 recognized the United Kingdom and the United States as occupying powers ("the Authority") in Iraq. Not exactly a sweeping mandate for US intervention. All of these documents are in the public record and I encourage you to do a little more research. End result: I WOULD NOT INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF YOUR ARGUMENT!

Nikolai | 05/07/08

Its really not part of it actually.

KittyCatRep | 05/07/08

Wow that is amazing... Live has 2 votes and didn't even submit an argument. I thought that we were supossed to vote on the debate NOT if people like the point I am defending or not.

KittyCatRep | 05/07/08

You're right kit, but demographics are also big part of this site. whether that's good or bad, i don't know, but if i were to vote on just the arguements, you'd have my vote. of course if i were to vote just on demographics, you'd already have my vote.

MorgMcA | 05/08/08

KittyCatRep, will you kindly finish our debate on Americans and Surveys

POST | 05/08/08

Thanks Morg, and DONE Proud.

KittyCatRep | 05/08/08

-Does the UN really matter, they have no power. The state comments for example, uganda needs financial support. They don't accually do anything about it except complain that the world isn't doing anything either. -When voting, you should be non-bais about your views and look at the agruement that the person makes and see who has owned the other. It's like the OJ Simpson trial. He was guilty (according to his book) but his lawyer made a better agruement than that of the sorry a** state attornies. -Point 3, 4000+ troops killed. You may think that this number may be against kittycat but acually, think about it. What would the dead soldiers say about moving out of Iraq. If we pull out (metaphorically also) of Iraq, then the deaths of these vailiant soldiers would be in vain. -Last point, do you remember 9/11 of the weeks after where almost every american put an american flag in their front yard or on their car. Well, maybe you don't remember because you, (Nikolia or any other person against the war), are unpatriotic. McCain FTW!

miamibadboi | 05/08/08

The UN does not count, as you said they have no power, but their resolutions can be the basis of justification of wars. That helps a nation's standing in the eyes of the rest of the world, though they just about all hate us, or somethings we've done, anyway. Hmmm... I think I'm arguing/supporting my point in comments instead of actually debating. What the flip is the matter with LiveForReason?! Post an argument for God's sake!

KittyCatRep | 05/08/08

Bush simply didn't then, and doesn???t now, have any understanding of the Middle East mindset. He thought he would be seen as a liberator. Anyone with the slightest understanding knew better. Bush went in without any plan to get back out. He is a dismal failure and will probably be seen through history as one of, if not the, worst Presidents. The supports for his actions were at best weak and the UN caved to US pressure. We certainly didn???t see the global presence we saw in the first Gulf War or anything close to it. I don???t know of any wide spread support for occupying Iraq.

Borsia | 05/09/08

My recollection is that Bush deliberately usurped the UN by intentionally holding them up as if they were supposed to find the fault that would permit him to invade, and they did not, because their inspections did not discover any weapons at all...no trace...and Bush didn't like that and inisted on his view IN SPITE of the evidence and tried to make it the UN failure as if their fault, and pushed for his view and actual invastion, shown his intention entirely, and he didn't want any possibility of proper view, that was intolerable to him. He made the decision and THEN got the UN backing, all his intentional behavior to make it appear as if they indeed had chosen WHAT HE CHOSE when indeed they had not, and to offer world view of proper peace, he forced a vote for his deeds, which were BUSH DEEDS of OFFENSE without EVIDENCE, and it was in the world's face, as WAR by BUSH and NOT OK. Major league not ok. UN no power is a BUSH desire, and BOLTON as well, and NOT OK. THE NEW PRESIDENT that replaces BUSH should have the REALITY CHECK not a war reality wanted by the president without any proper cause or evidence, OH SO HILLARY OH SO OBAMA OH SO MC CAIN. CONDI RICE IS the cause, I believe. She is horrific and ought to be dishonorably declared AN ENEMY of our GOVERNMENT and PEACE world wide. Peace is not done by invading a country that is not our enemy. That is not ok. AND, there was NO EVIDENCE to support the invasion, and BUSH didn't like that. He worked around the UN in a deliberate circle of use and offense. I have hated BUSH BEFORE DURING and hate HIS ALREADY ENVISIONED AFTERMATH of no peace progress and the ridiculous claim of HIS, that WAR is PEACE. BUSH is WAR. OH YES, it certainly IS his fault.

Elizabeth | 05/09/08

I wish people would make up their minds. Is Bush the idiot "dubya" or the criminal mastermind manipulator? Did "dubya" manipulate CIA evidence of WMDs in Iraq, convince and/or coerce Congress into advancing his agenda, while simultaneously overpowering the UN and our allies in a scheme to get oil and win revenge for the attack on his father? If he did, it is certainly not the work of a simpleton and people should at least acknowledge that he is smarter than the combined leaders of the rest of the free world. Yes, Bush is the Illuminati!

Ariyel | 05/09/08

Ariel, has it occurred to you that the people who paint him as a criminal mastermind (usually fringe flakes) aren't the same people who call him incompetent? I know, all the droves of people who think Bush stinks seem to bleed into one America-hating voice, but if we try hard enough, I think we can distinguish the well-reasoned from the not.

IamFry | 05/09/08

Well Elizabeth, you really can't comment on this then since you are so prejudicial. Do a little research and you will see that 1) Bush went off the informantion the intelligence community gave him, so if anything it is their fault and 2) there are numerous underground tunnels out of Iraq into other parts of hte MIddle East. It it so unreasonably to think that Hussein would move his WMDs out of Iraq before the US got there? What the freck does Condi have anything to do with this? An enemy of the US? Shall we get you some psychiatric counselling so you can vent your conspiracies?

KittyCatRep | 05/09/08

PLEASE SUPPORT ME IN MY DEBATE VS. CHESTYPULLER. HE IS A SORE LOOSER WHO HAS ACCUSED ME OF CHEATING! KITTYCAT- COULDN'T AGREE MORE, EVEN HILARY CLINTON SUPPPORTED THE WAR!!! THEY WENT ON THE INTELEGANCE THEY HAD!!!!!!!! THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR HELPING SAVE MY REPUTATION!

gopdiva | 05/10/08

misleading statements really bother me kit, so you are really going to have to make up for the whole UN approval thing. but then again everybody is human so i will hear you whole argument.

Skipper04 | 05/12/08

I'll be able to make up for it Skipper only if I get a chance to post again. Besides that was just my opening, I was counting on another turn or two to explain everything.

KittyCatRep | 05/12/08