International law

From: Henry Gregor (henrygregor@yahoo.com)
Wed Sep 14 11:38:43 2005


Illegal...not really....read the 4th Geneva Convention clauses, not the 3rd...also, the longstanding chain of violations of the first Gulf War and chain of UN resolutions has been analyzed differently by other folk. One can argue it that way as validly as the other, independent of the fact that it was a collossal (IMHO) mistake for the US to get involved. We sure as hell didn't do it to get cheaper oil (coulda' bought it for decades at whatever price per barrel with the military spending alone) and left it to the rest of the world to give a hoot about ignored UN resolutions and broken treaties. Might have given folks time to take umbrage at the oil for food boondoggle at the UN....the scope of which is mindboggling, though conveniently ignored by most of the world. (Far easier of course to say sanctions were harming the Iraqi people rather than their leader's misuse of F for P funds.)

Just an opinion.

Hank

Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.NA> wrote: Just an observation.

Usually (as in this case) the US goes into a country to save the dicator and fight the people.

Noody on earth asked the US. It is an illegal war, in violation of international law, as is the detention without trial (against which the former South African detention looks like a holiday camp, by the way).

Again, this skewed view of the world is fascinating...

el > In a message dated 9/14/05 2:30:40 AM, el@lisse.NA writes:
>
> > But What I am not agreeing is the
> > lack of concern when it concerns Ruandans, Sudanese and so on.
> >
>
> Just an observation.
>
> When the US goes into a country to save the people, topple a dictator,
> fight terrorists, etc. she's criticized for being imperialistic, oil
> grubbing, etc.
>
> When the US DOESN'T go into a country which is having a civil war, having
> a famine, whatever, she's called selfish or unconcerned.
>
> So, you just gots to do what you gots to do and let the opinions fall
> where they may. Everyone HAS an opinion, ya know.
>
> Joe P.

Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.





use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  OB-GYN-L Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net
Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Tue Sep 2 05:04:41 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.