ALEXRUS,
UN resolutions 678, 687, and 1441 all approve the use of military force if Iraq is in military breach of its obligations. All resolutions against Iraq were passed under chapter VII rules which allow for the use of force!
"It was chosen and done by the US... What does UN have to do with that?"
Wrong the UN already voted in resolutions 678, 1441, and the first Gulf War Ceacefire agreement, that member states of the UN were authorized to use all means necessary to bring Iraq into compliance if it was found to be in material breech of its obligations.
It is true that the United States, United Kingdom and Australia are the only members states with troops on the ground in Iraq, but they have full authorization to be there according to the UN resolutions. There are several other UN operations in other countries where only one or two countries actually have troops on the ground.
"Well, there's no government in Iraq at all now. What I see there is an occupational regime. Until there is a new, legitimate government sanctions will remain. Why should we facilitate things for another illegal regime that replaced Saddam?"
In order to ensure that Iraq remains disarmed in the future, a stable government most be allowed to be built. Keeping Sanctions that were designed for a prior regime only hinders the building of a new democratic government.
The Russians, Germans and French, need to wake up to reality. Their Business partner Saddam is gone. Causing problems by not supporting the lifting of sanctions is not going to bring Saddam back.