Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Hang on, what you've said above is that international approval is more important than doing the right thing?
If removing a dictator was opposed by the majority of the UN, you'd be against it yes? That's what you've said.
However, if they all changed their mind, you'd suddenly be for it?
You'll also support GW1 yet when actions occur which negate the ceasefire, you then don't support the continuation of GW1.
|
To paraphrase the old song
"I say to-ma-toe, you say bedwetting commie pinko terrorist supporter!"
Xaccers, I know I have a Scottish background, but I have never have had anyone have so much trouble understanding what I have been trying to say (I could be less tolerant, and assume you are twisting my words and putting provocative interpretations on my statements for another reason, but that would not be kind).
It must be wonderful to always know what the "right thing" is - I applaud your convictions.
I did not say what you have typed above - what I said was that under international law, it is not up to one or two countries to decide who is fit to rule - it is up to a consensus such as the UN (unless of course you have been attacked, which is a declaration of war). What gives the US or the UK the right to say "we know best"; if we do it, what is to stop other countries doing the same, but not to dictatorships, just to countries who they disapprove of.