On 3 Mar 2006 08:04:13 -0800, "Gus" wrote:


Cliff wrote:
On 2 Mar 2006 21:12:24 -0800, "Gus" wrote:

Cliff wrote:

The "no fly zones" were illegal & violated many laws.
Iraq had every right to defend it's airspace.


Thank you Ramsey Clark.

You think otherwise, eh?
Find it.

"U.S. officials know that the no-fly zones have been illegal from the get-go."
"The no-fly zones were unilaterally established by the U.S. government after
the Persian Gulf War, supposedly to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq. There was
one big problem, however: The United Nations never authorized the no-fly zones
to be established."
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0211h.asp

"Again, the no-fly zones are not imbedded in any UN resolution. This is
something the United States, Britain, and France essentially did unilaterally
.."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middl...raq_12-31.html

"Although the "no-fly-zones" have never been sanctioned by the Security
Council, under Paragraph 8, the U.S. could justify its use of military force
against Iraq, if Iraq fired on a U.S. airplane which was unlawfully violating
Iraq's airspace within these zones."
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew74.php

[
WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE MEMO SAYS:

President Bush to Tony Blair: "The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance
aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on
them, he would be in breach"
]
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/whitehousememo

HTH

So to sum it up, the no-fly zones in Iraq would have been "legal" if
the UN said they were. The same UN whose leaders were on the take under
the oil for food program that Saddam used for bribe money.
GW

IOW You are confused.
HTH
--
Cliff