2007-02-27 11:42:17 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It cannot have been illegal unless it violated an existing law.
Since there were (and are) no laws prohibiting the act - the action was legal.
The fact of the matter is that all of the claims that the war is 'illegal' should be frightening to anybody who believes in the 'rule of law.' Do you really want other people's political opinions be the deciding factor in determining the legality of something?
What is next - let them declare that all political views other than their own are illegal?
2007-02-27 13:38:04 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well is not against US law because Bush invade with the congress support. But the war is illegal in terms of the international law. All military action should be approved by the Security council of the UN and obviusly 3 members with veto power said not to the war, and the general asambly of the UN could be the option but Bush invade before the general assembly could even discuss the topic. The violation of the cease of fire as you call it is not an automatic autorization for a military action.
2007-02-27 20:09:38 · answer #2 · answered by maravilla 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I really don't like that people say "yes" on this.
Bush prior march 20th got approval from congress,and got a declaration of war against Ba'ath Iraq.
Bottom line,No he did not. no president has launched a "illegal' war in the history of the United States.
The fact that Saddam shot at our jets over 20 times breaking the gulf war ceasefire each time,by UN jurasition was justified de-declaring war against Saddam.
Thing is,the war between Saddam/NATO never really ended,the fighting ended in a ceasefire,same as the Korean war. North Korea and South Korea are still at war technically.
It's perfectly fine with me that people really dislike Bush,that's part of freedom of speech. But what is not ok with me and what i do not like,is when people get riled up by politics so much,that they are blinded and accuse people of really dumb things.
2007-02-27 19:53:52 · answer #3 · answered by Jessica_The_kitty 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. He could not do it on his own. He needed the approval of congress to invade. That means at one time, congress thought it was a good idea. The president has authority to deploy troops, but not to invade.
2007-02-27 19:50:33 · answer #4 · answered by idaho69442 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Any president can invade another country with the blessing of congress.
2007-02-27 19:49:38 · answer #5 · answered by BDZot 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes!
2007-02-27 21:40:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
uh...No..where have you been? Sucking on that kool-aide? UN sactioned, and Congress approved! Dude you got to stop wating what brain you have left! Or is "Left" the magic word!
2007-02-27 19:51:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes
2007-02-27 19:45:44 · answer #8 · answered by HalJor 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Yep
2007-02-27 19:47:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Yes.
2007-02-27 19:45:19 · answer #10 · answered by Ajax 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋