Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Iraq war was arguably immoral but not illegal. The "coalition of the willing" refers the few countries willing to fight in the war. But again, why didn't Russia veto the resolution to enter Iraq? They had the opportunity and didn't
Read your own article again. Annon doesn't call it illegal. He allows journalists to say that. He believed there should have been separate votes to prolong the war (use force after the invasion). In other words, they got the vote to go in and take over but once they didn't find wmd they should leave. But the invasion was legal.
But surely this Russian invasion is illegal. They didn't even consult the UN. They have multiple times affirmed the existence of Ukraine as an independent country. The fact that Putin doesn't care about international law is why they should try him as a war criminal in the future.
(Annan)"He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."
The "coalition of the willing" came about because many traditional US allies did not support the invasion. Why Russia didn't veto it is anyone's guess.
(Annan)"He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."
The "coalition of the willing" came about because many traditional US allies did not support the invasion. Why Russia didn't veto it is anyone's guess.
Yes, and the US/British position points to 1991 resolution (first Iraq war) and the subsequent wmd resolution of 2003 and claims this was enough to prosecute the war and not just the invasion.
So why no trial if America acted illegally? Probably something to do with America being the sole superpower at the time and both Russia and China agreeing with much if not all what the USA wanted. The situation has now changed. I doubt China or Russia would go along with a new invasion of Iraq because America is not viewed as powerfully as before.
Russia could try to complain that if they were a superpower again then they could bend the rules. I don't think it will do them any good. International law does tend to follow realpolitik and Russia will be prosecuted harshly for this current invasion. I am not saying it is totally fair but I am saying it is legal.
As for GWB and peoples opinions. Well, opinions are like a**holes. everyone has them. But he was never tried by the UN or an international court. I do believe Putin will be put on trial though it might be a long time in the future.
Interesting article a friend sent me. A must-read interview with Fiona Hill. To summarize, as to the question whether Putin would use nuclear weapons, her take is, yes, he would. It also provides some background on the historical reasons for the conflict.
Who is talking about 1830? I am talking about 2003. I was a college kid then. I remember the day when the bombs started falling on Baghdad very well. I remember thinking "oh man those idiots have really done it!".
That's this century. You were alive then. Did you vote for Tony Blair? There's people - not just a few - working today in the MOD or in the FCO who were working there back then. Same as there's plenty of people lurking around D.C. who had something to say back then, too. In fact, the current President - I'm pretty sure - voted for that war!
It's not Whataboutism, it's holding people accountable and pointing out hypocrisy when it stares you in the face.
I know exactly what it means, I also know that you're trying to hide behind technicalities in order to avoid having to accept that the UK has in fact even in this century made aggressive war on other sovereign nations. Did you vote for Tony Blair's Labour in 1997, 2001 or 2005? If you did, congratulations, you voted for that.
I know exactly what it means, I also know that you're trying to hide behind technicalities in order to avoid having to accept that the UK has in fact even in this century made aggressive war on other sovereign nations. Did you vote for Tony Blair's Labour in 1997, 2001 or 2005? If you did, congratulations, you voted for that.
I asked you for the last time the UK annexed anywhere, you haven't answered (it seems you don't understand what 'annexed' means), its something countries did in the 19th Century, the last European's to do it were Hitler and Mussolini, the world has moved on - apart from Putin and his cronies though obviously!
Putin is like a 21st century Hitler and that comical little fat fella from Belarus (can't even remember his name) is his Mussolini!
I asked you for the last time the UK annexed anywhere, you haven't answered (it seems you don't understand what 'annexed' means), its something countries did in the 19th Century, the last European's to do it were Hitler and Mussolini, the world has moved on - apart from Putin and his cronies though obviously!
Putin is like a 21st century Hitler and that comical little fat fella from Belarus (can't even remember his name) is his Mussolini!
The last British invasion of a sovereign nation was 2003 Iraq, before then arguably 1991 Iraq, before then 1940 Iceland. Maybe I'm missing one. All those colonial wars I suppose weren't invasions since you already were occupying those countries, so I guess since you had started oppressing the locals in the 19th century or earlier even it's fine.
The last formal annexation by Britain was likely that of the South African Republic into the British Empire in 1902.
Now you may note that no formal annexation of Ukraine has taken place and honestly I don't expect it occur. What has taken place is a Russian invasion of Ukraine. And for that Britain provided a very recent historical precedent.
I am sure all of this will not faze you in the slightest, but neutral observers may arrive at their own conclusions as to whether Britain can truly take the moral high ground when it comes to interfering in other nations' affairs.
The last British invasion of a sovereign nation was 2003 Iraq, before then arguably 1991 Iraq, before then 1940 Iceland. Maybe I'm missing one. All those colonial wars I suppose weren't invasions since you already were occupying those countries, so I guess since you had started oppressing the locals in the 19th century or earlier even it's fine.
The last formal annexation by Britain was likely that of the South African Republic into the British Empire in 1902.
Now you may note that no formal annexation of Ukraine has taken place and honestly I don't expect it occur. What has taken place is a Russian invasion of Ukraine. And for that Britain provided a very recent historical precedent.
I am sure all of this will not faze you in the slightest, but neutral observers may arrive at their own conclusions as to whether Britain can truly take the moral high ground when it comes to interfering in other nations' affairs.
I didn't ask that, I asked you to tell me the last time the UK annexed a separate sovereign state. Putin is doing it now in the 21st century, something civilised countries got over by the end of the 1800's (apart from Hitler and his cronies of course)
I didn't ask that, I asked you to tell me the last time the UK annexed a separate sovereign state. Putin is doing it now in the 21st century, something civilised countries got over by the end of the 1800's (apart from Hitler and his cronies of course)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
