Just for the record, though, the action in Iraq was not illegal because Russia and China vetoed it. The action in Iraq was illegal because the United States walked away from the Security Council because it could not secure a majority. That is, the nations on the council, including the non P5 countries, examined the evidence and found that there were big holes in it. If the U.S. had followed process they would not have been in the mess that it is currently in.

“What about the 5 body bags that came home from East Timor?”

“Sure, sending troops overseas is risky. Clark’s point isn’t that Key would have risked troops on overseas missions. Her point is that Key would have sent troops overseas on ILLEGAL, badly planned overseas missions. East Timor was a peacekeeping mission that was sanctioned by Security Council Resolutions…..”

In other words, Charlie Tan, when Russia and China veto a UN action at the Security Council, anything done after that by the USA and its friends, will be “illegal”………

So, FINE, we go by that here in NZ, and we’re still allies of the USA and not of Russia and China?

BARF. SPEW. CHUNDER. PUKE.

Sure, sending troops overseas is risky. Clark’s point isn’t that Key would have risked troops on overseas missions. Her point is that Key would have sent troops overseas on ILLEGAL, badly planned overseas missions. East Timor was a peacekeeping mission that was sanctioned by Security Council Resolutions. It was also a mission whose goal was to provide a modicum of stability so that political solutions to conflicts could be found. It was not a balls-to-the-wall war without a plan that was predicated on a whole shitload of lies. The ability to differentiate the two demonstrates judgment. Key’s was surely lacking. And the point is, there is no reason to trust him with similar foreign policy decisions in future.

“How many US non-combatant military personel were killed in Iraq during the time Helen had NZers over there? ”

I’m not sure that is relevant. In fact, I think it is rather offensive.

September 17th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
just all about massaging the numbers..eh dpf..?”

Well Philu. you’ve been doing quite well on numbers yourself. Somewhat of a record for you isn’t it?

a total of 56 people so far today bothered to vote that you’re dickhead

(and not a bodybag in sight)

“Belligerent” is an international legal term that refers to parties engaged in warfare. New Zealand went into Iraq under the aegis of U.N. resolution 1483, which was specifcally aimed at providing “humanitarian relief, the reconstruction of Iraq, and the restoration and establishment of national and local institutions for representative governance” after major interstate combat had ceased. The resolution also distiguishes between “occupying powers under unified command (the “Authority”)” and “other States that are not occupying powers” which are nevertheles working under the Authority. Finally, it is important to note that other states that had not been involved in the invasion (like the Netherlands) were deployed under the resolution and made it quite clear that they were doing so on the same basis as New Zealand. Hell, there was even one state whose Constitution legally precludes it from being a belligerent (Japan) that was deployed under resolution 1483.

It is quite clear, on the other hand, that National saw 1441 as significant justification to send NZ troops into Iraq. It is also quite clear that they supported deployment of combat troops in order to help the Americans and the Aussies stick it to Saddam and mop up all of those weapons of mass destruction that he had lying around. You don’t even have to listen to J.K.’s statements:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0703/S00192.htm

But you can:

“Murray McCully: The Government may get up and say it is helping in the war against terrorism, is entering into the conventions, and has troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Let me tell the House that the reality is—

John Key: Too late.”

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/Daily/9/b/b/47HansD_20030910-Volume-611-Week-36-Wednesday-10-September-2003.htm

So, from the lips of the man himself, Helen Clark’s actions are not comparable to the actions John Key would have taken. John Key wanted more involvement – that is, combat action – in a rather retarded war that has proved to be counter to the interests of its main belligerent. EVEN JOHN KEY AGREES WITH LABOUR THAT HE WOULD’VE TAKEN A MORE HARDLINE STANCE

You can try and spin this one anyway you want Davey, but neither you nor Wikipedia were right. I see, however, that some sensible person has removed us from the belligerents list. At least that’s one of you who can change their mind.

‘are you a first year student?’..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Will she have her pay pro rata compared to Bush? – please say yes

How many troops have died without even leaving the country while she has been PM?

Does she know how many Aussies in Iraq have been killed?? – I believe its 2, both due to accidents.

Wikipedia is your proof?

Classic David, your blog is becoming a laugh a minute!

The first casualty of war is the truth.

Also true of socialism.

“Socialism’s actually the second casualty of war.”

RUBBISH, Ryan Sproull, governments get to make major encroachments on the freedoms of their citizens and of markets, in time of war, and then when it’s over, those encroachments don’t get wound back again. You obviously haven’t read “The Road To Serfdom” by Hayek, otherwise you’d be quite clear on this point.

“……Poor deluded phule – understands nothing about the human condition.

Little lesson for you phule – In the entire human history – Peace is just a time between wars.

That’s the problem with you green idiots, you dream of changing thousands of years of human behaviour in a couple of decades as you sit comfortably in the conditions created for you by all the men and women that died in the last World War.

Your grip on reality is tenuous, at best.”

AGREE, Chicken L.

Here is another little famous quote for the “phules”;
Baruch Spinoza: “Peace is not the absence of war, but a virtue based on strength of character.”

Oh, she didn’t mean what she said? so Trotter is going to follow her around for the next 7 weeks and interpret for her? fuckwit.

Spin spin spin….Clark needs all the help she can get after yet another dose of foot-in-mouth-disease.

My contempt for the Labour party leadership is beyond anything I thought I could ever feel for another human being.

“Note too that we’ve lost more soldiers to accidents in NZ than we have in six years of war in Afghanistan and a year in Iraq.

Hell, we could save lives by getting them into conflict zones as quickly as possible”

As I said above, it is a little known fact that the US military also had a higher death toll in the years of PEACE preceding Afghanistan/Iraq.

“….Note too that we’ve lost more soldiers to accidents in NZ than we have in six years of war in Afghanistan and a year in Iraq.”

JC, it is a little known fact that the US military also had a higher death toll in the years of peace preceding Afghanistan/Iraq.

Chris Trotter puts Clark’s statements in perspective here.

Bryan Spondre aka redbaiter_baiter