International law is what ever the power majority make it, and enforcement is non existant.
Unless you aren't the power majority, then we'll enforce it on you.
Poll: DELETED_74993
- Thread starter DELETED_74993
- Start date
- Status
International law is what ever the power majority make it, and enforcement is non existant.
Unless you aren't the power majority, then we'll enforce it on you.
exactly.
International law is anarchy in it's purest form where might makes right.
Also there are plenty of wars we don't get involved in that would probably be declared "illegal" under the line half these people spout purely because it's too much hassle for very little or no gain.
I understand that politicians rarely speak the truth and that you have to read between the lines, and/or watch what they actually do rather than just what they say.
I understand that politicians don't care about ordinary people. None of them do. They don't care about you, they don't care about me, they don't care about the Libyan civilians. They care only about money and power. They are sociopaths.
speaking of reading between the lines
about there is where you pass from reasonably informed and healthily sceptic to just plain silly.
where you say that every politician is mentally ill I'd say is were you pass the sceptic/nutter line.
about there is where you pass from reasonably informed and healthily sceptic to just plain silly.
where you say that every politician is mentally ill I'd say is were you pass the sceptic/nutter line.
I don't agree with that DD.
A fair amount of politicians do have honest intent and purpose. It's not tarring all politicians over one event, but identifying the behavior of them in a larger collective group which is heavily influenced by history, pomp and longevity of the very Establishment they are near the centre of.
To be fair this had also kicked off before parliament, a representation of us, had been consulted on the matter. This brings with it many 'peer' pressures as well when it eventually comes to discussion, especially when considering the sensitivities of war and national pride and the whole situation summed up with a 'humanitarian' sticker.
A fair amount of politicians do have honest intent and purpose. It's not tarring all politicians over one event, but identifying the behavior of them in a larger collective group which is heavily influenced by history, pomp and longevity of the very Establishment they are near the centre of.
To be fair this had also kicked off before parliament, a representation of us, had been consulted on the matter. This brings with it many 'peer' pressures as well when it eventually comes to discussion, especially when considering the sensitivities of war and national pride and the whole situation summed up with a 'humanitarian' sticker.
Debatable. And I see from google that it isn't just me who has noticed it.
http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=ps...q=0&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=90ea73dc39ba861b
For example, from the first google hit.
Last edited:
I can accept that there are a small number of decent politicians but that's it. And these people don't tend to reach the higher echelons of power.
As a quick example, IDS and the conservative party happily supported the action taken against Saddam in 2003.
They did not ask the pertinent questions that were needed, they all happily bayed for blood with out proper due care and attention to the facts presented.
It was only later did the conservatives turn on the issue for genuine or political reasons, but by which point the war's launch is succesful and we're well into it and the slight of hand has worked.
They did not ask the pertinent questions that were needed, they all happily bayed for blood with out proper due care and attention to the facts presented.
It was only later did the conservatives turn on the issue for genuine or political reasons, but by which point the war's launch is succesful and we're well into it and the slight of hand has worked.
No they don't normally, the Establishment is rotten to the core simply.
Good caring politicans do great work in their constituencies and elsewhere, and importantly can help hold the commons to account.
If it really was like you say, this country would be a fair bit worse than it already is.
You might find it amusing or informative to listen to the late George Carlin's take on politicians.
I won't link to the clip as it contains a couple of swear words but if you go to YouTube and enter the following, it is the first hit.
george carlin who really controls america
I won't link to the clip as it contains a couple of swear words but if you go to YouTube and enter the following, it is the first hit.
george carlin who really controls america
I think the world is pretty bad already mate TBH.
ah h yes Kimberly back that well known psychiatrist and author of the fantastic "How to Choose a Nail Polish Color for Every Season" guide q wonderfully reliable source for medical diagnosis DD.
Sociopathy is a fairly sever medical condition dd and if the majority of politicians were sociopaths it would be immediately apparent and they'd have been diagnosed on mass by now, also i think it would also **** up all the percentages for the diagnosis.
the un resolution is suposed to stop civilians beeing targeted.
it is way past that stage and they are just encouragint he rebels to take the country which is not the resolution and its putting more civilians at risk than gaddafi did, when the militia reach tripoli what do you think will happen? a massive blood bath
[TW]Fox;18734884 said:
because the facts bush and blair has about WMD's in iraq for certain...
can we rely on these facts any more than they can?
maybe gaddafi is churning out weapons grade plutonium in his basement and i bet if obama said that you would be the first to believe it
Last edited:
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Has anyone claimed Gadaffi has WMD's? Not sure they have?
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,599
Yep. Too late. You have armed rebels against Gaddafi's forces. People who arm themselves and fight are not civilians in an armed conflict. Civilians are not being targeted as such but civilians will pay a very high price as in any modern conflict .... caught between fueding elements.
I think you are right in that the effect of the western intervention will be to increase the deaths of the people of the east of Libya when Gaddafi's forces get there.
This is where the national security clause comes in very handy.
- Status