[thechat] When is it time for war?

John Handelaar john at evolt.org.uk
Tue Mar 25 20:28:25 CST 2003


On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 02:09, Hugh Blair wrote:

> What's with this mantra that the UNSC must back this action?

International law, at risk of repeating myself till I
go blue in the face.

It exists, despite what you insist to the contrary.

> Where were all the protests against a mostly US action in
> Kosova? The UNSC didn't "back" any action there, yet most
> of the world was 'for' that action. 

Because of the rule-of-thumb (not legal, just basic
common sense) that action is justified *if* it saves
more lives than it costs.

Further, it actually did *only* enforce UN resolutions.
You'll recall we didn't invade Serbia, because it
WASN'T NECESSARY TO ENFORCE THE RESOLUTION.  We knew
they were in breach (which in this case we don't), we
knew where the breaches were occuring (which, because
we have no evidence of ANY KIND here, we don't in this
case), and therefore we had legitimate military-only
targets (which, in this case, we already clearly don't).

NATO (not US-led, you US-centric man, you) action in
Kosovo didn't kill over half a million people.  Desert
Storm did.  This will too.

I refuse to believe that an intelligent person like 
yourself is incapable of seeing the difference.  But
then again, yesterday you gave a hearty +1 to the dumbass
'all anti-war people shut up' comment, so maybe I've got 
you wrong.

-- 
John Handelaar <john at evolt.org.uk>



More information about the thechat mailing list