UN authorization can't make rank imperialism just

Paddy Apling e.c.apling at btinternet.com
Thu Mar 13 02:08:29 MST 2003

Richard Fidler 13 March 2003 01:24 quotes Stephen Gowans  (March 12, 2003)
> Tam Dalyell, a British Labour MP, says "that if (British Prime Minister
> Tony) Blair goes ahead with his support of an American attack (on Iraq)
> without unambiguous UN authorization.he should be branded as a war
> criminal and sent to The Hague."
> Dalyell's views are similar to those of many people opposed to war on
> Iraq. A war without UN authorization, they say, would be wrong.
> But if a war without UN authorization would be wrong, does that mean
> that a war with UN authorization would be right?

The final proposition is a non sequitor.  The proposition (1) "A war without
UN authorisation would be wrong" does support proposition (2) "A war with UN
authorisation would be right".

In the present situation it is ABSOLUTELY correct for the anti-war movement
to use proposition (1) as its main plank while taking every possible step to
ensure that UN authorisation is never given.  This proposition is the best
unifier for the anti-war movement in the current situation.

Tam Dalyell, the "father of the House" (i.e. the eldest - longest serving -
member of the House of Commons, and incidentally, like me, a chemist and a
former tank man in WWII) is a constant thorn in the side of Blair and his
side-kick Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and is to be warmly congratulated for
his efforts.

NFHS Member #5594
Mailto:E.C.Apling at btinternet.com
or http://www.e.c.apling.btinternet.co.uk

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list