UN Mandate for Iraq Expires December 31, 2008
I've been challenged via email about the "truth" behind the UN Mandate I mentioned in my last rambling. So, I dug up a few sources. True, it's not widely reported, but that fact does not negate the fact that the mandate exists, and Bush is insisting he's going to ignore that fact. Here's just a few:
NY Times January 2008: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/world/middleeast/25military.html
China Daily March 2008 (US news sources ignored this one): http://en.bcnq.com/world/2008-03/06/content_6513042.htm
If that does not sound like treason, then what does treason mean? The administration does NOT need congressional approval? When is the last time an American has read our Constitution? Obviously, just saying such things is grounds for impeachment. Doing them is criminal both domestically and internationally. Of course, we have nuclear weapons pointed at every nation in the world, so who's gonna be the one to call us on this?
BBC June 2008 (this was also not reported in the US - hmm, wonder why?) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7444525.stm
Will either of the two candidates stand up, focus on, and stick to the mandate? We will see.
The US news media also completely ignored this, which I will let you read for yourself and not bother to comment on because it's obvious Iraq does not see Iran as an enemy. You decide. IMHO, this is the way the world should be run, not with US troops 'policing' it. http://en.bcnq.com/world/2008-03/03/content_6503667.htm
NY Times January 2008: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/world/middleeast/25military.html
With its international mandate in Iraq set to expire in 11 months, the Bush administration will insist that the government in Baghdad give the United States broad authority to conduct combat operations and guarantee civilian contractors specific legal protections from Iraqi law, according to administration and military officials.
China Daily March 2008 (US news sources ignored this one): http://en.bcnq.com/world/2008-03/06/content_6513042.htm
The US administration can keep troops in Iraq into next year even after expiration of the UN mandate that governs operations there and without Congress' permission, says a senior State Department official in a letter to a Democratic lawmaker. In the letter to Democratic Rep. Gary Ackerman, David Satterfield said military operations can continue "beyond the end of this year under the laws passed by Congress and the president's authority as commander in chief." Satterfield's statement reaffirms the administration's position that it does not need international or congressional approval to conduct military operations anywhere in the world.
If that does not sound like treason, then what does treason mean? The administration does NOT need congressional approval? When is the last time an American has read our Constitution? Obviously, just saying such things is grounds for impeachment. Doing them is criminal both domestically and internationally. Of course, we have nuclear weapons pointed at every nation in the world, so who's gonna be the one to call us on this?
BBC June 2008 (this was also not reported in the US - hmm, wonder why?) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7444525.stm
UN mandate runs out on 31 December
Will either of the two candidates stand up, focus on, and stick to the mandate? We will see.
The US news media also completely ignored this, which I will let you read for yourself and not bother to comment on because it's obvious Iraq does not see Iran as an enemy. You decide. IMHO, this is the way the world should be run, not with US troops 'policing' it. http://en.bcnq.com/world/2008-03/03/content_6503667.htm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home