| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Without a UN mandate, the US and the UK have no right to go bomb another country in such circumstances.
No matter how just the cause, any action must be via the UN. |
|
|
|
 |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thebaldfacts wrote: | Without a UN mandate, the US and the UK have no right to go bomb another country in such circumstances.
No matter how just the cause, any action must be via the UN. |
You are correct in this case. The US didn't receive approval from the UN to enter Iraq ten years ago so it hasn't stopped them from intervening if they believe the cause is worth it.
The US are in a sticky situation. Do they intervene or not, and no matter what they do there will be backlash from both sides. Some will whinge that the US didn't enter Syria and therefore allowed Al Assad to continue these killings against civilians, but if they do intervene, everyone will complain that America's involved in affairs that shouldn't have anything to do with them in the first place.
I know that the situation with Syria is quite complex, so here is a link that kind of answers the questions about the whole situation.
http://www.cfr.org/syria/syrias-crisis-global-response/p28402#p5
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Woods Of Ypres
Joined: 27 May 2003
Location: Yugoslavia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
what a mess. if the current regime gets bombed and tossed aside it wont solve anything. another mob will take over and cycle starts again. Like many of the arab shit hole countries, Syria's population is divided into many tribal and religious factions each with their own violent agendas.
Hooray for Islam - the most barbaric and backwards of all religions. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^
Generalisation - tick
Bigoted - tick
Over simplification - tick
Needs removal from discussion - tick.
Inflames - tick
Adds to the discussion - nyet.
Shame, it started off so well too.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What colour are your eyes? |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| HAL wrote: | | What colour are your eyes? |
look into my eyes:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KYVb_OYz6g
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If the US go in they are sticking their noses in someone else's business.
If they don't, there's no oil there!
They can't win.
Couldn't win Vietnam either, but they tried
I just don't understand how whoever ordered that hit can sleep at night, justify it, and still breath. True evil.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | | thebaldfacts wrote: | Without a UN mandate, the US and the UK have no right to go bomb another country in such circumstances.
No matter how just the cause, any action must be via the UN. |
You are correct in this case. The US didn't receive approval from the UN to enter Iraq ten years ago so it hasn't stopped them from intervening if they believe the cause is worth it.
The US are in a sticky situation. Do they intervene or not, and no matter what they do there will be backlash from both sides. Some will whinge that the US didn't enter Syria and therefore allowed Al Assad to continue these killings against civilians, but if they do intervene, everyone will complain that America's involved in affairs that shouldn't have anything to do with them in the first place.
I know that the situation with Syria is quite complex, so here is a link that kind of answers the questions about the whole situation.
http://www.cfr.org/syria/syrias-crisis-global-response/p28402#p5 |
Thanks for the link Jezza.
Interesting, and scary reading
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Fire away. The military have so many new missiles that need testing and what a perfect place to test them on. Collateral damage is acceptable. They are killing each other so no great loss. |
|
|
|
|
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | | thebaldfacts wrote: | Without a UN mandate, the US and the UK have no right to go bomb another country in such circumstances.
No matter how just the cause, any action must be via the UN. |
You are correct in this case. The US didn't receive approval from the UN to enter Iraq ten years ago so it hasn't stopped them from intervening if they believe the cause is worth it.
The US are in a sticky situation. Do they intervene or not, and no matter what they do there will be backlash from both sides. Some will whinge that the US didn't enter Syria and therefore allowed Al Assad to continue these killings against civilians, but if they do intervene, everyone will complain that America's involved in affairs that shouldn't have anything to do with them in the first place.
I know that the situation with Syria is quite complex, so here is a link that kind of answers the questions about the whole situation.
http://www.cfr.org/syria/syrias-crisis-global-response/p28402#p5 |
I remember the first Iraq war with george Bush senior. I gave him full credit at that time as he had a mandate to kick Iraq out of Kuwait. He did this and stopped at the border and did not chase Iraq all the way to Baghdad. He was true to the UN mandate he received.
Going it alone and picking and choosing when to intervene when it suits you is too open to abuse. Either the UN gives a mandate and you follow that, or you do not become the gunslinger imposing your brand of justice. |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
To play devil's advocate, what if the best course of action is currently being blocked at a Security Council level by vested interests (i.e. Russia)?
I don't necessarily see the UN as some great arbiter of right or wrong here, though I suppose it's good to have some form of checks and balances. And I certainly don't think America and the UK can be trusted with the moral high ground here.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
5150 
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | | Fire away. The military have so many new missiles that need testing and what a perfect place to test them on. Collateral damage is acceptable. They are killing each other so no great loss. |
Now just waiting for the WPT checklist..  |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I guess this qualifies as black comedy:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/so-whats-it-going-to-be,33662/?ref=auto
| Quote: | | Ive looked at your options, and Im going to be honest here, I feel for you. Not exactly an embarrassment of riches youve got to choose from, strategy-wise. I mean, my God, there are just so many variables to consider, so many possible paths to choose, each fraught with incredible peril, and each leading back to the very real, very likely possibility that no matter what you do its going to backfire in a big, big way. Its a good old-fashioned mess, is what this is! And now, you have to make some sort of decision that you can live with. |
If the options are as Fake Assad describes them, the best option still seems to be non-intervention. And I don't say that lightly.
What would a no-fly zone achieve, by the way?
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | I guess this qualifies as black comedy:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/so-whats-it-going-to-be,33662/?ref=auto
| Quote: | | Ive looked at your options, and Im going to be honest here, I feel for you. Not exactly an embarrassment of riches youve got to choose from, strategy-wise. I mean, my God, there are just so many variables to consider, so many possible paths to choose, each fraught with incredible peril, and each leading back to the very real, very likely possibility that no matter what you do its going to backfire in a big, big way. Its a good old-fashioned mess, is what this is! And now, you have to make some sort of decision that you can live with. |
If the options are as Fake Assad describes them, the best option still seems to be non-intervention. And I don't say that lightly.
What would a no-fly zone achieve, by the way? |
That's actually a pretty good article for a normally totally satirical site.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
