"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:08:00 -0000, "IMM" wrote:



Still conformed to a UN resolution.

You know very well that there was not UN support for the action taken.

There was. It was in existence since 1991 and covered the current
conflict.

Oh come on. That's not reasonable, If there had been UN support, it
would have been a UN action.
snip

To be fair, IMM is / technically / correct, if you take a very long route
[1] back through successive UN resolutions they all do indeed refer back to
that original resolution (No.1661 ?), but as you say, if there had been
actual UN support in 2003 there would have been 'UN' military forces
involved - rather than just military forces of member states.

[1] as only lawyers would do