It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by eternally_damaged
I'm sorry but that is one the funniest things I have ever read, the fact that certain countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons, whilst others are not
the US are "allowed" to harvest nuclear weopons, as long as they follow the international laws agreed by the UN
but remember the US haven't really got a clean record of listening to the will of the UN
they tend to make up their own mind regardless of what the UN or the rest of the world thinks of it.
Who started the the war in IRAQ and Afghanistan?
Sandman210372
It is as simple as this, if you fail to adhere to any of the above then it is illegal.
Originally posted by WestPoint23Yes the US has ratified the UN charter, which makes us binding to it, that does not mean however that our own laws are discarded. Once again the UN is not a world government.
Which is why I specifically emphasized in my very first post that under US law our actions were legal. You seem incapable of comprehending the difference between international law and domestic law.
Originally posted by Sandman210372
Dear all,
I am not sure if this has escaped everyones notice but both the US and the UK have both Uranium Enrichment programs AND Nuclear Weapons Development programs. Furthermore they have deployed Nuclear Weapons systems
The US Constitution states how the US declares war. The UN Treaty and various others to which the US is a signatory states when war is legal.
The invasion of Iraq was illegal under the Constitution and the Charter.
Originally posted by Sandman210372
WP,
You are wrong.
Cheers
S
Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Originally posted by Luxifero
I've taken numerous classes as i'm also centrified in this area of studies, and I still don't understand the point of you asking a member to take a class which can range between 4-6 hundred dollars these days, exclusive of text book prices, to somehow decry his argument, do you?
Originally posted by Sandman210372
To save yourself further embarrassment you might want to read up on your Constitution and the US's responsiblities under the UN Charter and the myriad of international treaties to which the US is a signatory.
It is as simple as this, if you fail to adhere to any of the above then it is illegal.
Therefore since the US has done this their actions are illegal.
International Law 101 for Seeker.
You are aware that International Law only matters if it matters to the state; if it does not, then there is no legal and binding, nor enforced, International Law, merely interpretations, for International Law never trumps national interests.
Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon against customary law, which they agreed to follow [ie: a treaty called the NPT], because it is in their national interests to do so. A treaty is only binding when a state remains in constraint of said treaty, thus, for the treaty to be non-binding, the state must exit from said treaty. Has Iran withdrawn from the NPT? If it has not, Iran is legally bound to uphold the principles of said treaty.
Thats International Law 101
Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist
Im confused seekerof, so its ok for the US to violate international law but its not ok for Iran??? can u clarify this for me?
Originally posted by Sandman210372
WP,
You are wrong.
Cheers
S
Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
Well first of all, with their illegal war in Iraq, for starters....
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Ok cheers, I would just like to point out Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
As you can see under Article 51 the countless attacks upon our fighter jets patrolling the No-Fly zones would have alone given the US the right to retaliate against Iraq.
[edit on 4-2-2006 by WestPoint23]