>World
>order is not served by unilateral military action, to which I do object. But
>world order, human rights and international law are likewise not served by
>allowing a genocidal monster to remain in power.
That may be true, but neither is international law served by flouting international law. It is equally clear that international law is not served by selectively enforcing international laws or UN resolutions. In fact both are clearly a disservice to international law.
Human rights would be well served by strengthening of international law. However the US is not motivated by a desire to advance international human rights and is one of, if not THE most, hostile nations on Earth to strengthening international law. It is a gangster nation and gangsters are always hostile to the notion that they should abide by any law. Gangsters may prefer a little order of course, but their kind of order is not to be confused with law or a respect for human rights.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas