<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><img id="33cc653f-7324-480d-aa05-c2f0f984284e" height="18" width="122" apple-width="yes" apple-height="yes" src="cid:C300D966-5B46-4F75-81CE-A9491D005DD8@att.net"></div><span style="font-family: Palatino, Georgia, Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 25px; text-align: justify; "><div>But this question ignores the obvious: If the United States begins an attack without Security Council authorization, it will flout the most fundamental international rule of all — the prohibition on the use of military force, for anything but self-defense, in the absence of Security Council approval. This rule may be even more important to the world’s security — and America’s — than the ban on the use of chemical weapons.</div></span><div><span style="font-family: Palatino, Georgia, Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 25px; text-align: justify; "><br></span></div><div><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/opinion/on-syria-a-un-vote-isnt-optional.html?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130904&_r=0">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/opinion/on-syria-a-un-vote-isnt-optional.html?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130904&_r=0</a></div></body></html>