Bush's Lies Caused The Iraq War

[R.C. Christian]

Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.

Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.

Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD matter.

Where Bush went wrong was to seek war rather than let the inspections continue.

People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.

Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.

Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.

Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD

People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.

Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.

The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.

 

[BlindBoo]

It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Where is the clause that President Bush used that said if he decided too, even though we signed on to SCR 1441, he could simply opt out and invade and occupy Iraq without the UNSC or it's resolutions?

 

[TooTall]

Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.

Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD

People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.

Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.

The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.

The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.

 

[TooTall]

It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Where is the clause that President Bush used that said if he decided too, even though we signed on to SCR 1441, he could simply opt out and invade and occupy Iraq without the UNSC or it's resolutions?

Excerpts from UN Resolution 1441.

Recognizing the threat Iraq’s non-compliance with Council resolutions and
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to
international peace and security,

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all
necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore
international peace and security in the area,

Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire
would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including
the obligations on Iraq contained therein,

Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular
through Iraq’s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA,
and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687

Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that
it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its
obligations;

 

[U2Edge]

Its not a lie that the United States and other intelligence agencies around the world had intelligence that Saddam had WMD.

You are not responding to what I've written. On 07-13-2014 10:24 AM I wrote, “I have presented a case that Bush lied on March 17, 2003 that he claimed to have intelligence that left no doubt that Iraq was concealing the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors."


No Democrats made that claim. I am not disputing that "the United States and other intelligence agencies around the world had intelligence that Saddam had WMD" in the past.


We all know that Saddam "had" WMD. Bush lied on March 17, 2003 because ten days before that he exposed the truth that he did not have any such incriminating intelligence that would justify a US and UK invasion.

If some intelligence was obtained after March 7, 2003 Bush was obligated as a UNSC member nation to offer that intelligence to the UN inspectors to be checked out. There was no offer because the inspectors left on March 18 an 19 because Bush was planning to invade. Are you suggesting that he lied to the UNSC by concealing intelligence from them?

Iraq was in material breech of multiple UN resolutions on March 7. Iraq was in material breech of multiple UN resolutions on March 17. Ever since November 1990 when resolution 678 was passed, the United States and other member states of the UN have had all the authority they needed to use military force against Saddam to bring about compliance. The United States was ALREADY using military force against Saddam in the run up to the ground invasion. George Bush already had all the authorization that he needed from a legal standpoint on March 1, March 7, March 10, March 17, March 20 etc etc. Whatever any draft of non-used resolution said is IRRELEVANT given those facts!

 

[U2Edge]

It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !

It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.

The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!

 

[U2Edge]

We invaded Iraq because hussein kept violating un sanctions and not allowing inspectors where they needed to be.

There were no serious reports by Blix or el Beradai that the 2003 UNSC inspections by UNMOVIC or the IAEA were denied full access to sites by Iraq. Blix said that Iraq cooperated on process immediately with very few issues. Blix referred to cooperation on process meaning access to sites and other logistical requirements to allow the inspectors to do their work.

Saddam Hussein in December 2002 offered Bush to send US military and intelligence inspectors into Iraq to look for WMD firsthand. That offer in no way can be construed to mean that Iraq would not let inspectors access to all sites. You are quite wrong.

Saddam may the same offers in the 1990s. We know how that turned out. Its not up to Hans Blix to resolve anything. Its up to Saddam to resolve the issues and bring about compliance in total and full with every aspect of all 17 UN Security Council Resolutions passed under Chapter VII rules. That includes accounting for all the Kuwaiti citizens and Kuwaiti property that were still missing from 1991 as of 2002!

 

[U2Edge]

Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.

Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.

Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD matter.

Where Bush went wrong was to seek war rather than let the inspections continue.

The United States was already at war with Iraq when Bush first entered the White House. The United States had been bombing Iraq every year since 1991. Iraq was not in compliance with UN Resolutions which authorized the United States and other member states of the UN to use MILITARY FORCE to bring about compliance. That is why the resolutions were passed under Chapter VII rules instead of Chapter VI rules which don't all the use of military force to bring about compliance.

Military force was already being used against Iraq. Using ground units is a tactic, and is undistinguishable from the term military force or the "use of all means necessary" or "serious consequences". Bill Clinton had authorization for all uses of military force while he was President from resolution of 678. George Bush had that is well, and covers any use of military force!

 

[U2Edge]

Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.

Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD

People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.

Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.

The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.

No one lied, and Bush had more support for the military action he took from the public than his father did for the first Gulf War. He also had overwhelming congressional approval. He was then re-elected President in 2004! That's called approval by tens of millions of people, far greater than any poll could demonstrate.

 

[U2Edge]

It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Where is the clause that President Bush used that said if he decided too, even though we signed on to SCR 1441, he could simply opt out and invade and occupy Iraq without the UNSC or it's resolutions?

UNSC resolution 678 was authorized the use of all means necessary to bring Iraq into compliance with current passed resolutions THEN and all SUBSEQUENT RESOLUTIONS PASSED AGAINST IRAQ UNDER CHAPTER VII RULES!

Resolution 678 along with several other previous resolutions were reaffirmed in the body of 1441!

 

[BlindBoo]

It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !

It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.

The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!

".....while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process..."

The US signed onto SCR 1441 and the reneged on the obligation when:

"The government of Iraq decided not to avail itself of its final opportunity under Resolution 1441 and has clearly committed additional violations," Negroponte said.

Without following the terms of that agreement.

U.S. Cites 1991 U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution as the Legal Basis for Its Invasion - Los Angeles Times

 

[U2Edge]

The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.

The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.

That is true, but it helps with foreign relations to get approval.

 

[kaz]

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Lied people Diedddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

You've got that right. Pretty low class of you to be joking about it.

The big lie in Iraq was the Democrats saying they were lied to instead of standing behind their own actions.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Christopher Hitchens wrote a great piece called "Appointment in Mesopotamia" which outlined why we were going to be there anyway.. sooner rather than later.

Bush just thought it best we did it on our own terms.

 

[U2Edge]

Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:

The UNSC in Resolution 1441:

{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;


11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}


Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.

Do you recognize that fact now?

Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !

It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.

The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!

".....while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process..."

The US signed onto SCR 1441 and the reneged on the obligation when:

"The government of Iraq decided not to avail itself of its final opportunity under Resolution 1441 and has clearly committed additional violations," Negroponte said.

Without following the terms of that agreement.

U.S. Cites 1991 U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution as the Legal Basis for Its Invasion - Los Angeles Times

Regardless of the "Final Oportunity", it clearly states that Iraq is in MATERIAL BREECH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. Being offered a "final opportunity" does NOT change that FACT!

It also does not change the fact that the United States and other member states already had authorization under prior UN resolutions reaffirmed in 1441, to use military force and had been using military force against Iraq, EVERY YEAR since 1991!

 

[BlindBoo]

Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !

It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.

The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!

".....while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process..."

The US signed onto SCR 1441 and the reneged on the obligation when:

"The government of Iraq decided not to avail itself of its final opportunity under Resolution 1441 and has clearly committed additional violations," Negroponte said.

Without following the terms of that agreement.

U.S. Cites 1991 U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution as the Legal Basis for Its Invasion - Los Angeles Times

Regardless of the "Final Oportunity", it clearly states that Iraq is in MATERIAL BREECH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. Being offered a "final opportunity" does NOT change that FACT!

It also does not change the fact that the United States and other member states already had authorization under prior UN resolutions reaffirmed in 1441, to use military force and had been using military force against Iraq, EVERY YEAR since 1991!

Did the UN Security Council Resolution 1441 provide sufficient legal basis for military action against Iraq? - US - Iraq War - Pros and Cons - ProCon.org

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Regardless of the "Final Oportunity", it clearly states that Iraq is in MATERIAL BREECH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. Being offered a "final opportunity" does NOT change that FACT!.

Of course UNSC Resolution 1441 states that Iraq is in material breach of its obligations. That is why 1441 was passed. I am not arguing that Iraq was not in material breach of its obligations in resolutions passed prior to 1441.

I am pointing out the error you made on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you claimed that, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself."

Besides being wrong your claim makes absolutely no sense. Why have 1441 at all? The purpose of 1441 was to give SH an opportunity to comply with all his obligations so as to avoid war.

If you still think 1441 says what you claimed on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM, you ought to post it.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.

That is true. I agree 100%. What is your point?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Its up to Saddam to resolve the issues and bring about compliance in total and full with every aspect of all 17 UN Security Council Resolutions passed under Chapter VII rules.

Where does 1441 invoke Chapter VII?