• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Europe under extreme duress

Griz882

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
Mirage said:
So... by your comments I gather you understand that:
-In China, the "rules" were not upheld because the UN is broken.
-In Africa, the "rules" were not upheld because the UN is broken.
-In Iraq, the UN said Iraq must allow inspectors in, but never authorized any sort of war, which we subsequently carried out unilaterally.
-in SA, you claim we followed a rules-based approach because our president unilaterally signed a document saying it was ok. I'm sure Putin did that with Ukraine, too. That doesn't mean we get carte blanche "legally" to overthrow foreign governments because we don't like their current one.

So, if the rules are repeatedly broken and not enforced, how do you consider them rules the world lives by?

You say that each nation has an obligation to stay within international law. Says who? Who obligates them? Who smacks them if they don't? The UN? Unless you know something every international relations student and expert knows, there is no higher international authority than the nation-state. They answer to nobody, except the more powerful nations that might smack them if they do something they don't like. Any "legal and moral rationale" is just how the leaders justify the actions to the public and other states. They are not bound by any higher power to do anything by any legal code.

Lastly, your graphic is one of the worst non sequiturs I think I've ever seen. The fact that fewer people have died in war since WW2 is absolutely not because of the UN or whatever "rules based order" you think it represents. It is because the largest, most powerful countries have nukes, and aren't stupid, with a few smaller contributing factors like globalization. That is obvious to anyone who has studied this stuff for even a minute, which I know you have. I'm baffled.
Click to expand...
No.
No.
No.
No.

You can be as ignorant and obtuse as you desire, but I was very clear in my comments. You are getting significant push back in this discussion because you are being willfully ignorant.
 
M

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Griz882 said:
No.
No.
No.
No.

You can be as ignorant and obtuse as you desire, but I was very clear in my comments. You are getting significant push back in this discussion because you are being willfully ignorant.
Click to expand...
I am the one being willfully ignorant? You literally said, "Did the UN fail…yes they did" regarding both Chinese and African genocides, and now you say you didn't say that? You're a troll.
 
Brett327

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Mirage said:
So the UN did something once, and your conclusion is the international community is rules-based, even though I've pointed to many many instances where nothing was done?

You know, you might be on to something, though. It's not often everyone in a field agrees on something the way international relations experts agree the international system is anarchic. That means there is room for you to start your own theory and maybe get something new published.. maybe even name it after yourself.
Click to expand...
“Once” ?

I invite you to do a quick review of the last 30 or so years, focusing on the UNSCRs.
 
M

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Brett327 said:
“Once” ?

I invite you to do a quick review of the last 30 or so years, focusing on the UNSCRs.
Click to expand...
Is your point that the UN is the lifeblood of our international community and always keeps the offenders of the international laws in check?
 
sevenhelmet

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top