Re: [OT] The record industry, RIAA and US law
On Thu, 10 May 2007 10:06:09 +0200
Johannes Wiedersich <johannes@physik.blm.tu-muenchen.de> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Celejar wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >> Maybe it's true that you thought that, but besides that your statement
> >> is plainly wrong. Most Europeans *are* opposed to the US involvement in
> >> Iraq, because it is neither right legally nor morally. Their number is
> >
> > Because they think it is neither right legally (which authoritative
> > body has said so?) nor morally (needless to say, many of us disagree).
>
> The UN. Please read my reply to Roberto. Irrespective of what these or
> those politicians claim, the text of the Charter of the UN is simple: no
> war or force without explicit endorsement by the security council.
Where does any binding international law state that no war or force is
legal without explicit endorsement by the security council (not a
rhetorical question - I'm uncertain about this).
>
> >> increasing, because the mission failed and fails besides throwing Saddam
> >> out of office.
> >>
> >> The whole mission is a textbook example of how it probably is impossible
> >> to bring about democracy, peace and freedom by application of force.
> >
> > Impossible? Where were Germany and Japan before and after WWII?
>
> Before: similar to Iraq. Then *they* started a suicidal war, leaving
> their country in ruins and many people dead. The violence was started by
> the Germans themselves, not from someone outside. That's the whole lot
> of a difference. Germany was in ruins after the war, by its (or its
> governments) own fault.
Are you arguing that peace, democracy and freedom can arise through war,
but only if the war is a suicidal one started by the bad guy? What's
the logical justification for such a distinction?
> Plus: the allies managed to set up law and order after defeating the
> Germans.
Well, we're certainly trying; it's (some of) the Iraqis who are
destroying their country by their vicious, animal savagery.
So you mean that "It's possible to bring freedom, peace and democracy
by war, but not if the local inhabitants behave with suicidal
savagery".
> There are more differences between Germany 1945 and Iraq now, but these
> two make a whole lot of difference.
I don't really understand the difference, as above. In any event,
you're conceding that your original statement was an overly broad
exaggeration. Can you mention the other differences?
> Johannes
Celejar
--
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator
Reply to: