Search results

International law has no force, sanctions on South Africa were enforced by individual nations should anyone decide to violate that decision, either via domestic law enforcement cracking down on anyone within a country that tried to violate the national decision to embargo South Africa, or by...

US law matters, because US law is actually backed up by the power need to enforce it and compel compliance. International law lacks that force. ....Do you actually know what sanctions are, because those actually can be enforced, since they're, again, a matter of US law and are backed by force...

The UN and international law effectively refuse to recognize the validity of claims of territory gained via conquest and military force. Which would be worth caring about, if they had the power to back that opinion up with anything more than a harshly worded letter, but they don't.

Might makes right is how the world actually works, though, laws only matter to the extant that force is available to back them up. International law is particularly toothless in this regard, as the international community has no force on hand to back it's demands, particularly for nuclear weapon...

I don't recall the UN charter granting the UN authority to mircomanage where a country's capital is, that's a major intrusion on national sovereignty that no nation would ever tolerate.

The international community has no right to dictate that.

Well, no, that's not what happened, per their own government: in 1980, well after any warfare related population movements had stopped, there were only 650,000 thousand people in the strip, the increase by a factor of nearly 4 is due to internal factors and not anything Israel did. With...

[ First soure is conflating collateral damage with collective punishment, second one is flat out wrong as white phosphorus is not a chemical weapon, and you don't even cite a source for the third, which tells me everything I need to know about it. The UN has filed more human rights complaints...

Could be construed, but only by ignoring context. Hamas, like many terrorists, has a well documented habit of intentional intermixing it's infrastructure with civilian infrastructure and using civilians as human shields, because it forces Israeli forces to either ignoring hamas's war materials...

Arguing that Iran, a nation where the US was involved with a coup against it's leadership, has passed economically devastating sanctions against them, backed a rival nation's war on Iran despite the regular use of chemical weapons and other inhumane actions, and so much more, is aligned against...

I'm sure a few billion here and there will be no big deal to Lockheed, yes. I'm equally sure the congressional representatives who come from districts that Lockheed is based in will continue to decide that giving Lockheed more work and more orders is a win win situation for all involved, and so...

Philosophy. It pops up from time to time in many US churches. Prosperity theology is at It's core a response to the sort of rich lifestyle that's common in the US and that isn't always in particular alignment with Christianity, and people want something to try and rationalize thier way past that.

Prosperity stuff is neither exclusive to evangelicals nor is it universal within evangelical churches (nor is dubious theology in general a uniquely evangelical issue). Jews as God's chosen people is straight from the Bible, Deuteronomy 7:6 for example. There's certainly debate as to what that...

Yeah, that would have been my guess. Americans suddenly concluding that supporting Israel is no longer in our best interest doesn't quite fits the facts, as nothing about the two sides or region has changed all that much lately. Americans being suddenly propagandized into changing opinions...

I don't see it as important, the government does, and you don't quite seem to be grasping how this works. It's not "ok, let's give Israel a few billion so they can buy F35s instead of buying them for the airforce" It's "we've already bought all the F35s we're going to, let's let Israel buy a few...

This sort of hits the nail on the head as to the issues with some of the more anti-Israel positions here. America First is America First and not America Only, if it's in our best interest to go to war, support other nations, or something else, it's entirely permissible to get involved (which is...

And we'll find that out.....how? Even if we assume you can knock out a large organization like that with a few assassinations (you can't, BTW, we escalated to a full on war with military hunter-killer teams and still didn't manage it), finding both the people we want dead and the people who want...

That was a stance we didn't even stick to then, since our stronger than normal friendship with France was one reasons we could be sure that the British wouldn't decide to renegotiate the Treaty of Paris at gunpoint. It's certainly not one we can stick to now. Washington lived in a world where...

They've been a more or less trustworthy ally and consistently play ball with us, and are arguably the only state in the middle east that's a trustworthy ally on their own merits (as opposed to someone like the Saudis, who are only barely on our side and we still have to bribe them). If we're...