What Clinton did or didn't do is a moot point and merely serves to distract from the main point of debate.
Many have claimed that the US was authorised to go to war due to previous UN resolutions. If this was the case, why were the UN security council so
opposed to this action?
The only way military action is legal is if it is sanctioned by the UNSC and since two members were promising to veto it, I don't think you had their
approval. The war was illegal because it was clearly against the will of the UN and the UNSC members.
If not, why do you have a coalition of the 'willing' rather than a UN sanctioned force?

