Re: [OT] The record industry, RIAA and US law
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 04:25:34PM +0200, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:39:06PM +0200, Joe Hart wrote:
>>>> That type of law is one reason. Iraq and general foreign policy is another.
>>>>
>>> See, I thought the main reason that many Europeans were opposed to US
>>> involvement in Iraq was because they were illegally profiting in Iraq in
>>> violation of the UN sanctions.
>> 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
>> increasing, because the mission failed and fails besides throwing Saddam
>> out of office.
>>
> Really? What about the stack of UN resolutions promising military
> action if Saddam did not comply? Were those illegal too?
No, but they didn't charge the US+allies with enforcing them. See [1,2].
To quote from The Charter of the UN:
/----------
Article: 42
Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in
Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may
take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to
maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may
include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or
land forces of Members of the United Nations.
\----------
The US never waited for the Security Council to consider anything.
Article 41 is about non-military intervention (embargos etc.)., ie. the
kind of resolutions you talk about.
Johannes
[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_UN_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_war#Outbreak_of_War
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Legality_of_invasion
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGQgxaC1NzPRl9qEURAruDAJ0Z4OAZbyGyTT+7zocf2nA5sW1t0QCeLahv
rQkn4IXcjxfAW44d9l8vdaU=
=lJAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: