2 ms·

Even a resolution of the UN security council means nothing. I wasn't talking about international law. Israel is willing to go to the mat on this, and apparentl

Even a resolution of the UN security council means nothing. I wasn't talking about international law. Israel is willing to go to the mat on this, and apparently convinced this is a life-or-death issue. A lot of other countries, including the only superpower, NATO and the EU agree or at the very least don't want to let Israel be destroyed if Israel chose to stop Iran's nuclear program. As far as international consensus goes, that's pretty strong. "Aggression" is quite an arbitrary definition. Iran has threatened Israel with annihilation for decades, and occasionally they tried. They do/did have a nuclear program, they certainly have chemical weapons. They keep attacking shipping and causing further armed conflict around the region... "International Law", which today mainly consists of Russia and China sabotaging everyone else, is not going to stop Israel from defending itself.

cf141q5325 7y ago
>I wasn't talking about international law. I know, I was. I dont care much for the semantics of how warcrimes are tried to be painted as "the right thing to do". > War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. If you forgo international law in favor of might is right what you do is cultivating terrorism as the victims get radicalized and have no other way to left to respond. And thats not a new insight. Al Quaida was rather vocal about drone strikes and the atrocities in Abu-Ghuraib and Guantanamo being the best recruitment tools they could have ever asked for. And lets also not forget that the war on terror only recently cumulated into the emergence of ISIS, with the rank and file of Saddams dismantled army being there for the creation. People cant be so thick that they believe the phrase "They hate us for our Freedom". "They" hate us for invading their countries with our politicians and soldiers acting with impunity. I mean the US even sanctioned the ICC for gods sake. All those "necessary evils" breaking international law are only making the situation worse.

cf141q5325 7y ago

>I wasn't talking about international law. I know, I was. I dont care much for the semantics of how warcrimes are tried to be painted as "the right thing to do". > War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. If you forgo international law in favor of might is right what you do is cultivating terrorism as the victims get radicalized and have no other way to left to respond. And thats not a new insight. Al Quaida was rather vocal about drone strikes and the atrocities in Abu-Ghuraib and Guantanamo being the best recruitment tools they could have ever asked for. And lets also not forget that the war on terror only recently cumulated into the emergence of ISIS, with the rank and file of Saddams dismantled army being there for the creation. People cant be so thick that they believe the phrase "They hate us for our Freedom". "They" hate us for invading their countries with our politicians and soldiers acting with impunity. I mean the US even sanctioned the ICC for gods sake. All those "necessary evils" breaking international law are only making the situation worse.