a) The U.S. lacks proof that Iraq maintains weapons of mass destruction.
b) The U.S. lacks U.N. support for military action against Iraq.
c) The U.S. applies its negotiation/military strategy unfairly to different nations.
The above reasons provide evidence why the U.S. is not justified in waging military action against Iraq, without full consent of the U.N.
Points of Argument (Reasons & Evidence)
a) The U.S.’s motives in waging military action against Iraq are suspect both domestically and internationally.
b) Within the U.N., the U.S. lacks international support for waging military action against Iraq.
c) The U.S. unfairly applies its negotiation and/or military strategies to different nations.
d) The U.S. lacks proof that Iraq has returned to a program of building nuclear weapons.
e) If the U.S. acts against Iraq without U.N. approval, the credibility of both the U.N. and the U.S. will vastly suffer.
Should the U.S. act unilaterally against Iraq without full U.N. approval, it is difficult to view these actions any differently than the alleged actions being perpetrated by Iraq.
The U.S. is not justified in waging war against Iraq without full U.N. consent due to a variety of reasons. These reasons stem from dubious motives on behalf of the Bush Administration and growing domestic and international opposition to lack of evidence against Iraq to justify military action and the lack of U.N. approval. As we shall now see, these reasons do not justify the U.S. waging military action against Iraq without full U.N. consent.
Points of Argument (Reasons & Evidence)
a) The U.S. should not act without U.N. consent because of growing domestic and international suspicion about U.S. motives. In France, Germany and other nations popular support for military action is low. Only 15% of French voters and 20% of German voters sup
...