On 19 Dec, Anatoly Vorobey wrote:
But Saddam's regime itself stemmed from illegal takeover of a previous regime -- doesn't that make all of his regime illegitimate and his authority void?
No, by this argument nearly all the regimes of the world would be illegitimate. Saddam ruled a terrible regime, but he also overthrew a terrible regime. Anyway, Saddam enjoyed the authority of democratic acquiescence, which is the accepted standard. Even if Saddam's regime were illegitimate, which it was not, the aggresive acts of the US were still illegal. No authority can be derived from an aggressive and illegal invasion.
By extension, the US puppet government in Iraq also has no plausible claim to authority.
Why not?
By definition, a puppet government rules by the leave of the military power, the US, which has no claim in this case to any legitimacy in Iraq. Thus, the puppet government can have no claim to legitimacy either. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type APPLICATION/pgp-signature]