what do YOU think about United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441???
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284).
Resolution 1441 specifically stated:
1) That Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to WMDs, but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops in 1991.
2) That 1441, and its deadline, represented Iraq's final opportunity to comply with disarmament requirements. In accordance with the previous Resolution
WHAT resolution (be specific) did Israel violate?
I need to know!
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
hold on, i;ll come up with something very soon, let me just the two points for now
- schrumLv 43 years ago
U.S. ultimate courtroom Justice Robert Jackson, who served because of the fact the supervisor prosecutor of the main Nazi conflict criminals, referred to as commencing a conflict without reason the "ultimate conflict crime" because of the fact all different conflict crimes flow from it. below the United countries shape, this is a binding international treaty ratified by using usa of america, it is prohibited to attack yet another u . s . different than: a million) while authorized by using the protection Council; or 2) while needed for self-protection and then basically for as long as needed to get the difficulty to the protection Council. the protection Council unanimously exceeded decision 1441 that discovered Iraq in fabric breach of previous resolutions and warned of "extreme outcomes" if Iraq did no longer conform. yet that decision additionally explicitly suggested that the protection Council remained seized of the difficulty and usa of america assured the different individuals that decision 1441 did no longer authorize it to attack Iraq; the U.S. could could return to the protection Council for yet another decision until now it may attack Iraq. In early 2003, usa of america did return to the protection Council with a decision authorizing an attack on Iraq. while it grew to become sparkling that the proposed decision could no longer muster a majority, usa of america withdrew the call and attacked Iraq besides. there is not any crime greater extreme than illegally commencing a conflict.
- Mark PLv 51 decade ago
1441 didn't authorize war, and Saddam was effectively contained. If 1441 was so compelling, why did Bush and Blair have to lie so thoroughly in order to try to justify their actions?
And if you want to start talking about countries systematically violating U.N. resolutions, start with Israel, which has thumbed their noses at dozens of resolutions regarding their long-standing illegal occupation of Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese territory.
Here's a comprehensive list of resolutions presently being violated - you can see Israel is #1 by far:
- Anonymous1 decade ago
It does not matter what we think.Source(s): poor sad little man with ants for sale told me