Israel kills top hamas leader with 2000 pound bomb

[Jackson50]

1) You said I have a vendetta against you and specifically target your posts. That was your point, and it was incorrect.

2) Yes, there is a difference. France desired for the US and other allies to stay and assist them. Iraq has made it abundantly clear that they do not wish for coalition forces to continue serving in Iraq. That is why all non-US forces must cease operations on May 31 and must completely withdraw from Iraq by July 31. It made no sense for those other nations to redeploy troops from the mission they had just finished. By the time they redeployed and could contribute, it would be May 31 and they would have to cease military operations.

3) Iraq is a haven for Al-Qaida because of the invasion. The few pre-war links between Iraq and Al-Qaida are tenuous...at best. Regardless, that was not your initial assertion. Your initial assertion was that our European allies "tucked tail and ran" when we attacked those who attacked us. Al-Qaida attacked the US on 9/11 and, even though they are a decentralized organization, Al-Qaida's main area of operation was Afghanistan. Many Europeans, as my link indicates, are aiding the US in that war. This would indicate that Europe did not "tuck tail and run" when we defended ourselves against Al-Qaida.

Also, I would agree with you on the implementation of UN Resolutions had the Security Council authorized the US to enforce said resolutions. The US does not have cart-blanche to act on behalf of the SC. Although there is minor contention, most international law experts that I have consulted have concurred with my assessment that Resolution 1441 was not an authorization of force for the US.