The sanctions and no-fly zone were imposed by the UN after Iraq invaded Kuwait. On what basis do you call them illegal?

The sanctions are UN backed, the no fly zones are not:

Following the Gulf War, no-fly zones were set up north of the 36th parallel to protect Iraq's Kurdish minority and, later, south of the 32nd parallel to protect the country's Shiite Muslims. They were implemented by the United States (under President George H. W. Bush), Great Britain, and France. As justification, the trio of nations cited U.N. Security Council Resolution 688, adopted in 1991 to condemn Iraq's brutal repression of the Kurds and Shiites. The resolution demanded that Iraq cease its "repression of the Iraqi civilian population."

However, the New York Times editorialized at the time that Resolution 688 provided a "dubious justification" for setting up the no-fly zones because it did not authorize the use of force to stop Iraqi abuses. And in 1993, the U.N. legal department announced that it could find no existing Security Council resolutions authorizing the United States, Britain, and France to enforce the no-fly zones. They are never explicitly mentioned in Resolution 688 or elsewhere. Furthermore, Resolution 688 was not enacted under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, the section that is used to authorize and legitimize the use of force.

France later backed away from its involvement in the no-fly zones, leaving the United States and Britain to enforce them. Other U.N. Security Council nations have never accepted their legitimacy.

Regarding the sanctions, in Oct 1998:

The outgoing United Nations coordinator of the so-called oil for food program in Iraq has denounced the ongoing trade sanctions that have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men, women and children.

Denis Halliday, head of UN humanitarian operations in Iraq, resigned his post effective last week. He announced his intention to resign last July, citing personal opposition to the economic blockade. Halliday managed the oil for food program for 13 months and prior to that had been with the UN for 30 years.

On October 6 he told a briefing in Washington, DC, organized by the Arab-American Institute and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, that UN estimates of 5,000 to 6,000 Iraqi children dying every month were "probably modest." "The death of one Iraqi child attributable to economic sanctions is one death too many. Unfortunately, we are faced with thousands," Halliday said. "It is unnecessary and unacceptable to allow this human tragedy to continue."

One is illegal, the other had been disowned by an insider.

as i understand it, the no fly zones were not called for by the un. i believe (i read or heard on the radio) that there is a un resolution that has language that is used as a loophole by the us and uk to impose no fly zones. but no un resolution ever approved the no fly zones, nor was the issue ever discussed by un diplomats. so it could possibly be argued that the no fly zones are illegal since they violate iraqi sovereignty, and are not explicitly called for by the un. who has better info on this?

It would appear that those responding argee with my point that war already exists in Iraq and is promoting genocide since all the quibiling relates to supposed legalities not the realities of what is occurring. And just because the sanctions were approved doesn't mean they are moral and not genocidal. (Trade Federation Stooge to Jedi: "As you know, our blockade is legal.") A Declaration of War makes war "legal" for the declaring nation but does not make war crimes legitimate as the Nuremberg Tribunal established, the Geneva Accords codified, and both the UK and USA ratified into their legal framework. The same logic applies to the "sanctions."

Empires (both formal and informal) get away with murder, which is part of the unacknowledged definition of Empire--its impunity. The wars of the 20th century proved the invalidity of Empire. Justice Jackson said that no person or country should be immune from the laws of war and humanity. Empire readily violates such laws with regularity. Thus Empire must be brought to justice and dismantled if the people of the planet are ever going to enjoy civility. There are empires other than the USA in existence, but the USA presents the greatest threat to humanity's civility. Although it's taken time to come about, the people of the world (especially in the west) are starting to take a stand on principle.

Yes, Saddam Hussein is a thug cultivated and supported by the very countries now strangling the Iraqis with a genocidal grip making his behavior like that of a kitten. Those countries are now the outlaws and must be brought to justice. What is happening now is another battle in the long war to establish civilization.