Talk:Formal disapproval

Cut or otherwise mangled:
 * However, the UN Security Council, which technically has a veto power over military action, did not actually hold a formal vote on a new resolution authorizing it - France having signalled beforehand that it would veto. (cut text indicated here in bold)
 * In this case, formal disapproval had the effect of causing the US and UK to act without UN cover, which had very serious diplomatic aftereffects. (entire sentence cut)

The first bullet point suggests that the UN organization has authority over the United States and other member states. This is a point of view that the current US administration disagrees with. So it can't be stated as a "fact" but only as the POV of whichever countries agree with it. Please list those countries which agree that the UN has the authority to veto ANY AND EVERY military action they may contemplate undertaking. (I guess it will be a very short list!)

The second bullet point asserts that the leaders of the 2003 invasion of Iraq had no "UN cover", which is strongly disputed by U.S. President Bush. In a major address shortly before the invasion, he cited several specific US Security Council resolutions which demanded that Saddam (a) purge Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and (b) prove that he has done so. --Uncle Ed 19:16, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)