Russia VETOES UN resolution regarding Syria chemical attacks

[MJHolland 12,725]

2 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

I hate to agree with an orange idiot but the world really should do something. Irs a shame we can't because that'd start WW3.

We'll probably continue Obama-like missile strikes on Assad's regime until ISIS taken control of Syria and then we have to go in, or we will "find" weapons (chemical or otherwise) of mass destruction and invade. Pretty familiar themes in the mid east tbh. I would be surprised if we don't invade under Trump.

[Born To Slay 10,996]

1 minute ago, MJHolland said:

We'll probably continue Obama-like missile strikes on Assad's regime until ISIS taken control of Syria and then we have to go in, or we will "find" weapons (chemical or otherwise) of mass destruction and invade. Pretty familiar themes in the mid east tbh. I would be surprised if we don't invade under Trump.

Ugh.... another middle eastern quagmire to drain our resources. Yay.

[Gagamel 3,410]

14 hours ago, MJHolland said:

First of all lets get one things straight, and that is international law is a fallacy. There are little to no disciplinary action ever taken, nor suitable international organization that can even enforce it -- especially when it comes to the US. Basic fundamentals of international relations tell us that states will do whatever they want and international bodies that try to control and punish states is inherently disorganized (chaotic) and weak when it comes to major players.

Technically every country the US bombs right now is both internationally illegal and domestically illegal.

This doesn't really have anything to do with humanitarian intervention, although interesting. The UN deals with humanitarian efforts with peacekeeper troops, which are entirely different from what we (+ the UK, Australia, and Poland) sent into Iraq.

Idk what "UN mandate" you are referring to. The only thing the UN can authorize is a limited number of peacekeeping troops. The UN does not have a standing army. NATO =/= UN. 

Still to this day the Iraq war was in clear violation of UN agreements and international law, but not action was ever taken against the US. The point of this ramble is that no, the UN does not get to decide at what time the US can invade a country. The US can invade whatever country they want with even slight provocation and the international community will turn a blind eye. 

  Reveal hidden contents

Much like Donald Trump could walk out onto 5th avenue and shoot somebody and people would still vote for him.

  Hide contents

His words not mine 

 

 

Completely agree. The UN and international law are just there for show basically. Same happened when the US decided to break international law and bomb Yugoslavia just because Clinton thought it would distract people from his scandal. It killed countless civilians and destroyed countless public buildings, but it's not like anyone cared, especially in the US.