acemuzzy wrote:So a perceived urgent humanitarian risk means a country can unilaterally do what it wants in foreign countries, does it? Without consulting anybody? I assumed international law had some checks and balances, but if you're telling me otherwise...
Eh? Where did I mention Trump? My point is that this rabble have been in power since 2010 and didn't interject previously. (it pains me to mention Cameron's failed vote in 2013 for purpose of fairness)Liveinadive wrote:Worth pointing out May, Macron and Trump have all been in power less than 2 years. What did you want Trump to do in 2012?I know when I'm not happy with something, I wait 7 years to do something about it.
yourfavouriteuncle wrote:acemuzzy wrote:So a perceived urgent humanitarian risk means a country can unilayetally do what it wants in foreign countries, does it? Without consulting anybody? I assumed international law had some checks and balances, but if you're telling me otherwise...
I’m not arguing against your sentiment at all but tbf Russia basically block pretty much everything when it comes to the UN council. Not advocating the bombing or the going alone but they do make a mockery of the whole voting thing.
yourfavouriteuncle wrote:I’m not arguing against your sentiment at all but tbf Russia basically block pretty much everything when it comes to the UN council. Not advocating the bombing or the going alone but they do make a mockery of the whole voting thing.acemuzzy wrote:So a perceived urgent humanitarian risk means a country can unilayetally do what it wants in foreign countries, does it? Without consulting anybody? I assumed international law had some checks and balances, but if you're telling me otherwise...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vetoed_United_Nations_Security_Council_resolutionsStopharage wrote:No more so than us, China, the US and (to a lesser extent), France.
I've known Michael a long, long time. Let me be very clear to the media. Michael never represented me in any matter. I never retained him in the traditional sense as retaining a lawyer. I never received an invoice from Michael. I never paid legal fees to Michael," Hannity said.
"But I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective," he added. "And I assume that those conversations were attorney-client confidential.
poprock wrote:
poprock wrote:
Gremill wrote:God, it really is pathetic. They should really focus on reforming the party so it stands for something other than vested corporate interests and make in mean something to the people who they want to vote for them.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!