>>>I guess Colin wasn't persuasive enough. Does that mean we win the argument?
>>
>>No, but that seems to be largely due to France.
>>
>>>Absolutely. This is an outrageous twisting of words, using "war" in a figurative sense, and then applying a literal interpretation. Classic BS form #107. If we accept such specious logic, we open the door to corruption of the most basic principles this country was founded upon. Every conceivable abuse of power is now permitted as an "exception" to the normal rule of law. The drafters of our constitution would be appalled by this preposterous distortion of their intent.
>>
>>I beg to differ.
>>
>>>You couldn't even issue a parking ticket on the strength of such evidence. This is your idea of something remotely resembling due process? Are we really trying to be helpful to the UN's efforts, or are we trying to prove they're ineffective?
>>
>>It apparently convinced quite a few countries: Great Britian, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Italy, etc.
>>
>>>Resolve is not enough. We will never succeed if we don't come to grips with the underlying reasons for people's anger. That's why we need an effective UN, not another demonstration of US military might.
>>
>>Should we also have tried to understand Hitler's anger at the Jews or Japan's anger at us, China, and Korea before we fought back?
>>
>>How about we have a big love-in with Saddam and Al-Quida? We can practice yoga, burn incense, and get in touch with our feelings.
>>
>>>>The women of Kosovo may beg to differ. And Saddam's son Uday's victims may also beg to differ.
>>>
>>>A throwaway line. We can never legitimize our role as the world's policemen in opposition to the UN. If there is to be any legitimate standard of international law, we must also comply with it.
>>
>>Hardly. The women of Kosovo were being raped. We, with NATO, went to war and put and end to it. Now they are not being raped. Case closed.
>
>Congratulations, Chris. That entire response was 100% non-responsive to a single point that I made. I agree, case closed.

I made my points, repeatedly in this part of the thread and others. We just disagree.