There seems to be some confusion regarding the legality of the war in Iraq.

[wtmusic]

I highly recommend the following source to those who believe the war was legal under either international or American law.

"Conclusion

The international law of self-defense supports the American use of force in Afghanistan. After the devastating attacks of September 11, the United States had the right to defend itself against continuing terrorist attacks mounted from Afghan territory. The United States has no right, however, to invade another state because of speculative concerns about that state's possible future actions. The current international order does not support a special status for the United States or a singular right to exempt itself from the law. To maintain a legal order that restrains other states and to uphold the rule of law, the United States should continue its conservative commitment to limits on the unilateral use of force, and reject a reckless doctrine of preemptive self-defense. "

The Myth of Pre-Emptive Self-Defense
www.asil.org/taskforce/oconnell.pdf

[NNN0LHI]

1. Won't be any confusion after listening to Pinky explain it at the link below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8

[ixion]

2. just a note: Afghanistan did not attack us on 911, either

hence, there was no reason to invade that country, either.