France shows some (small) balls

>From: Esa Laitinen punkki@suespammers.org
>Date: 11/8/2004 11:16 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <bus562-gmc.ln1@oma.laitinen.org>
>
>Scott wrote:
>> "Esa Laitinen" <punkki@suespammers.org> wrote in message
>> news:8k0562-7ns.ln1@oma.laitinen.org...
>>
>>>If "showing some (small) balls" means ignoring international law, no,
>>>France hasn't done that yet (in this case anyway).
>>>
>>>They at least have UN mandate. And, they attacked after being attacked.
>> Fuck the UN.
>
>Ok. What do you have to replace it, other than swift use of military force?

We've obviously already made that replacement, eh?


Popeye
The Greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing
the world he didn't exist. Kaiser Sose

John Mason Jr wrote:

>
>>
>> I don't know wether they asked for it.
>> I know that at times they did not ask, before taking action to protect
>> their citizens.
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>
> Like the Rainbow Warrior yeah now there was a threat


I was referring to a mission in which a friend of mine participated in
1977 between Kongo and Ruanda while he was in the foreign legion.

Matthias

Popeye NCAT3 wrote:

>
> We've obviously already made that replacement, eh?

"The higher they are, the harder they'll fall."

--
The suespammers.org mail server is located in California; do not send
unsolicited bulk e-mail or unsolicited commercial e-mail to my
suespammers.org address. It's my life: http://www.laitinen.org/blog/

TonyP <arpierre@hooptonline.net> wrote in message news:<zEUjd.47847$fF6.20248866@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv .net>...
> Popeye NCAT3 wrote:
>
> >>From: Matthias Voss spammat.voss@gmx.de
> >>Date: 11/8/2004 1:56 PM Eastern Standard Time
> >>Message-id: <cmofhu$fcb$02$2@news.t-online.com>
> >>
> >>Dillon Pyron wrote:
>
> >>>But at least it's showing something. The Ivory Coast may not be Iraq,
> >>>but they've invaded for all the right reasons. ie, because somebody
> >>>pissed them off enough to get them off their asses.
>
> >>First of all, they have a UN mandate to use military force.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, they -do- need to get permission, eh?
>
> You mean to say, that the French were attacked, the next day they
> retaliated, but they had a vote in the UN to do this? All in just one
> day? Did the USA vote on this?

AFAIK, under the UN mandate, we already had the right to use force to
enforce the ceasefire, which France did by destroying the aviation
assets that had been involved in breach of the ceasefire.

Plus self defense.

No need for a new vote. But yes, the US had approved the terms of the
existing UN mandate.

Cheers,

Froggy

>From: Matthias Voss spammat.voss@gmx.de
>Date: 11/9/2004 5:43 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <cmq717$plb$04$1@news.t-online.com>
>
>Don Qui-Scott wrote:
>
>> "Matthias Voss" <spammat.voss@gmx.de> wrote in message
>> news:cmofhu$fcb$02$2@news.t-online.com...
>>
>>
>>>Dillon Pyron wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>But at least it's showing something. The Ivory Coast may not be Iraq,
>>>>but they've invaded for all the right reasons. ie, because somebody
>>>>pissed them off enough to get them off their asses.
>>
>>
>>>First of all, they have a UN mandate to use military force.
>>
>>
>> So fucking what?
>>
>> Did you miss the part about the oil for money scam, just for a fresh one?
>
>What exactly has that to do with decisions of the security council?

This must be a translation thing.

>> The US doesn't seek, need or require a UN anything, for any reason.
>
>Obviously the have their guy there, and a veto seat in the security council.

That's so -we- can tell -you- what to do.

Don't ever confuse that.


Popeye
The Greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing
the world he didn't exist. Kaiser Sose

Popeye NCAT3 wrote:

>
>>>Did you miss the part about the oil for money scam, just for a fresh one?
>>
>>What exactly has that to do with decisions of the security council?
>
>
> This must be a translation thing.


?
The scandal in the food for oil money detours has nothing to do with
Ivory coast. Pls. step in where you feel the need to.


>
>
>>>The US doesn't seek, need or require a UN anything, for any reason.
>>
>>Obviously the have their guy there, and a veto seat in the security council.
>
>
> That's so -we- can tell -you- what to do.
>
> Don't ever confuse that.


I am glad you are in favour of the UN getting the US full support.

Matthias

"Matthias Voss" <spammat.voss@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:cmqhc2$k7a$00$1@news.t-online.com...

> The scandal in the food for oil money detours has nothing to do with
> Ivory coast. Pls. step in where you feel the need to.

It has to do with the simple fact that members of the UN can be bought, and
bought cheap.

> >>>The US doesn't seek, need or require a UN anything, for any reason.
> >>
> >>Obviously the have their guy there, and a veto seat in the security
council.
> >
> >
> > That's so -we- can tell -you- what to do.
> >
> > Don't ever confuse that.
>
>
> I am glad you are in favour of the UN getting the US full support.

As I indicated, the US doesn't need the UN for anything.

A big part of Dubya's popularity is that he was all too willing to thumb his
nose at them and their attempts to endanger the US for money

>From: Matthias Voss spammat.voss@gmx.de
>Date: 11/9/2004 8:40 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <cmqhc2$k7a$00$1@news.t-online.com>
>
>Popeye NCAT3 wrote:
>
>>
>>>>Did you miss the part about the oil for money scam, just for a fresh one?
>>>
>>>What exactly has that to do with decisions of the security council?
>>
>>
>> This must be a translation thing.
>
>
>?
>The scandal in the food for oil money detours has nothing to do with
>Ivory coast. Pls. step in where you feel the need to.

We were talking about -any- decision of the so-called "security council"
being bribable.

>>>>The US doesn't seek, need or require a UN anything, for any reason.
>>>
>>>Obviously the have their guy there, and a veto seat in the security
>council.
>>
>>
>> That's so -we- can tell -you- what to do.
>>
>> Don't ever confuse that.
>
>
>I am glad you are in favour of the UN getting the US full support.

I'm for an immediate withdrawal from the UN and NATO.


Popeye
The Greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing
the world he didn't exist. Kaiser Sose

>From: Matthias Voss spammat.voss@gmx.de
>Date: 11/9/2004 9:12 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <cmqj9d$fp6$02$2@news.t-online.com>
>
>Popeye NCAT3 wrote:
>
>>>The scandal in the food for oil money detours has nothing to do with
>>>Ivory coast. Pls. step in where you feel the need to.
>>
>>
>> We were talking about -any- decision of the so-called "security council"
>> being bribable.
>
>In that decisions of members should not be influenced by lobbying, or
>bribery, I concur with you. Absolutely.

But the record shows otherwise, eh?


Popeye
The Greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing
the world he didn't exist. Kaiser Sose

Popeye NCAT3 wrote:

>>The scandal in the food for oil money detours has nothing to do with
>>Ivory coast. Pls. step in where you feel the need to.
>
>
> We were talking about -any- decision of the so-called "security council"
> being bribable.

In that decisions of members should not be influenced by lobbying, or
bribery, I concur with you. Absolutely.

Matthias