Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (110346)	8/7/2003 3:47:33 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

There are situations where intervention is considered legitimate. To provide for some degree of international stability, countries agreed to use the Security Council of the UN to decide whether or not any given situation satisfies the criteria for legitimate intervention. The only situation where an individual country acts with legitimacy without the UN's process is in the case where it is under attack or about to be under attack immediately -- everybody has a right to self-defense. If you want to intervene for some other reason (primarily humanitarian), then you take the issue to the UN.

To: D. Long who wrote (110346)	8/7/2003 5:27:53 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Does a set of non-rights become a right, if assembled in sufficient numbers? Why does the US have no right to occupy Iraq, but once mandated to do so by the UN, suddenly acquires a right it didn't have before? Beautiful response D...!!!! Beautiful!! And of course, he'll pull something out of his b*tt to justify the UN as having more moral authority despite the fact that it refused to enforce it's own binding resolutions with any threat of force against Iraq. So the UN has the "legitimacy" to overthrow brutal regimes, but lack the will or means to do so (because many UN members are these very regimes)... Yet, a UNSC member has no authority to enforce those binding resolutions when the UN refuses to do so?? That's like living in a town with a judge who loves to issue warrants and judgements from his court, but has no cops to enforce them.. And then compounds that problem by denying the right of "citizen's arrest" to those who live in that town.. Hawk