What is the point of International Law...

...if it isn't going to be enforced?

Just watching Ross Kemp Midle East, and one of the points that struck me was the fact that Israel are curently involved in an illegal land grab, and that according to International law, there are Jewish settlements illegally built on Palestinian land.
I also know this is nothing new!

I ask, why have International law if it is not enforced. It is proven that it is illegal, why is there not anything done about it?

It would be someone like oh say Iraq invading Kuwait (I know politially the reason is slightly diferent) but the jist is the same.

Why is no one helping the Palesitinian people? There are what some call "terrorists" amongst the Palestinian people, some call "freedom fighters".
We all know who has the more guns/bombs/personnel, but does that make Israel right to take land from the Palestinian people illegally?

I gotta say, I try to see both sides, but as much as I try, I cannot have anything but disgust for what Israel are doing there.

Why is International Law being ignored in this region? Ordinary people are suffering, Palestinian people are backed into a corner, so have nothing else but their pride to fight for, so I can understand their willing to resist the Israelis, but what right does Israel have to cut off the Palestinian people from aid, food, the RIGHT TO LIVE?

I understand this is a very sensitive topic, and there are arguments from both camps, but the humanitarian crisis there cannot be ignored, as it is currently being swept under the carpet. Israel must release Gaza and the ordinary Palestinian people from their iron grasp.

To be honest, the main point of international law is to...
1. Prevent the spread of weapons to countries that might otherwise become like us.
2. To prosecute the enemy for being as barbaric or evil as we would be (in their resource starved situation)
3. To ensure debts lent to nations are repaid, that money is free to move globally, not just for international trade & development, but also so that the system allows the movement of money across world tax heavens.
4. To try stop the dumping of toxic waste, over fishing, and deforestation, or at least give the impression to the electorate that something has been done.

I view all these goals (apart from the one of providing those who back the political class ways to dodge their contributions!) as perfectly practical, and so generally desirable.
Fact is all nations of the world tend to reflect the personality of mankind, and you will see from both our present, and our history that character is quite evil.
So almost all nations exhibit evil personalities, and if they're don't, then they tend to get "regime transplants" from the nearest capable power that does e.g. Tibet falling to 1950's Communist China.

A-morality in a nations foreign policy is extremely healthy because it offers wealth and power, and we need these things for national security, the economy, and therefore increasing the living standards of own society.
A-morality does not mean governments can't have successful agreements about e.g. reducing the number of nuclear warheads. It just means you wouldn't stick to those agreements if they no longer suit you're (overall) position.

If the Western world of the future is ever over shadowed by an indifferent grouping of super powers like Chin, India, ?, then I'm sure international law will still continue to exist, only we would have officially become a region full of "Rogue States!"

Originally posted by celticniall
...if it isn't going to be enforced?

Just watching Ross Kemp Midle East, and one of the points that struck me was the fact that Israel are curently involved in an illegal land grab,

Really? You mean that they are occupying the land that they captured after Egypt amassed troops on the border and blockaded Israel, causing Israel to strike Egypt. drawing Syria and Jordan into the fight, along with troops from most Arab countries?

You mean the land they captured after demolishing the enemy force in only six days?

Six Day War anyone?

and that according to International law, there are Jewish settlements illegally built on Palestinian land.
. . .

Link

Take a gander at that before you spout off more of the senseless tripe that you have been fed.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh



Awww, come on, reliable un-biased source?? That link is anything but!

Spouting this "it was Israels land in the Bible, and 2000 years ago" does not give them any more rights. There are internationally agreed borders, that are recognised by International law.
By your own argument, any land grabbed by any invading nation in the last 2000 years should be give back to the original occupiers eh?

Does human rights come into this at all? Do the Palestinians not have a right to live on their land in peace and not in fear of constant encroachment by Israel?

What gives Israel the right to tramp all over these people? Israel were given the land, they had no more right to it than the British before them.

As I said, Palestinians are backed into a corner and have no options other than to try and fight and strike back at the encroaching Israel.
Just because Israel are more powerful, have more money and weapons, and of course have the backing of the big ole USA, does that make them right to massacre innocent people?

I don't think this is senseless tripe as you put it.....is it senseless tripe to massacre children?

reply to post by celticniall


International Law has become a weapon in hands of USA/UK to punish who they want too. The USA vetoes any action which goes against it's Sugar Daddy Israel as was seen in the case of GoldStone Report and breaks the laws as was seen in case of Iraq Invasion.

Unfortunately until USA either get's rid of Israeli Lobby or becomes a powerless there is no scope for International Law globally.

Originally posted by celticniall
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

Awww, come on, reliable un-biased source?? That link is anything but!

Want to discredited the points that it brings forth, or ignore it because it comes from a certain source?

Spouting this "it was Israels land in the Bible, and 2000 years ago" does not give them any more rights.

It was their land at the time, that is a fact. It was then taken over by the Romans, the Ottomans, and the British, before the land was given to be the new nation of Israel. That is historical fact.

What rights are you speaking of?

There are internationally agreed borders, that are recognised by International law.

Okay?

By your own argument, any land grabbed by any invading nation in the last 2000 years should be give back to the original occupiers eh?

That makes no sense. There would be no US, Canada, or Mexico if we gave land back to the original occupiers.

If you are saying that the land should be given back to the Palestinians . . . by all means. And I am sure it will be, once the Palestinians stop poking and prodding the Israelis.

But that won't happen.

Does human rights come into this at all? Do the Palestinians not have a right to live on their land in peace and not in fear of constant encroachment by Israel?

Stop shooting rockets into Israel, and they will be left alone. Quite easy, really. But no . . . the Palestinians have to provoke Israel, and then cry about the inhumanities of war.

Tough titty said the kitty.

What gives Israel the right to tramp all over these people?

Perhaps it has to do with the rockets being shot into Israel fro the areas? It has been shown, even since the inception of the re-newed, that the Arabs in the area would rather want violence over peace.

Israel were given the land, they had no more right to it than the British before them.

Yeah . . . okay. Let's give all land back to the original owners.

Back before "International Law," the land you took in war were kept as part of the spoils of war.

As I said, Palestinians are backed into a corner and have no options other than to try and fight and strike back at the encroaching Israel.

They are in a corner that they created.

Just because Israel are more powerful, have more money and weapons, and of course have the backing of the big ole USA, does that make them right to massacre innocent people?

Innocent?

You shoot rockets into Washington DC, or any other city in the world for that matter . . . and when they come and get you, claim you are innocent. See how well that works for you.

I don't think this is senseless tripe as you put it

Yeah it is

.....is it senseless tripe to massacre children?

Then stop shooting rockets from neighborhoods, schools, and hospitals maybe?

I would be interested to know what countries had a vote on "international law" and who actually set it up. Also, I would like to read its statutes because they would be a figment of lies - or, at least, they would be a list of honourable things that no nation would ever follow.

For one thing, it is a total farce as mankind has never got on across all nations and never will.

And it was probably set up by powerful countries who have this motto: "One for you and two for me, none for you and three for me, minus none for you and four for me......"

Originally posted by learningtofly
I would be interested to know what countries had a vote on "international law" and who actually set it up. Also, I would like to read its statutes because they would be a figment of lies - or, at least, they would be a list of honourable things that no nation would ever follow.

For one thing, it is a total farce as mankind has never got on across all nations and never will.

And it was probably set up by powerful countries who have this motto: "One for you and two for me, none for you and three for me, minus none for you and four for me......"

This might help you out a bit

Or maybe it won't, but it is a start