Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Apr 28
th, 2022 at 11:45pm:
That's what I keep asking you about, and you tap dance around the ice skating rink... by what means do you propose to actually impose this rule of law as designed by the United Nations with or without consent of all nations?
By consensus agreement of all nations.
Note the UNGA (c. all 200 nations) recently passed a resolution demanding UN examination and explanation by the relevant member whenever a permanent SC member resorts to use of the veto.
This is a first step on the path to recognition by all nations that
the veto itself must be eliminated, and along with that step, abandonment of the insane concept of "legal" war, in the age of MAD.
Quote:Who's going to sign up first? Russia? It is the right thing to do, after all... surely Putin wouldn't want to take any territory by force...... it's against the spirit of the Revolution....
It's a pity Trump wasn't a man of vision; I had hopes in 2017 that Trump, who was on good terms with both Xi and Putin, would be able to bang some heads together in the UNSC, given the incredible benefits available for all of them if they could avoid insane and expensive nuclear arms races, under real international law.
But I suppose Trump's main aim all along was to preserve US global hegemony, so he missed an opportunity to go down in history as the first person who enabled the UN to function as a peace keeping institution.
Quote:Let's go ask him ......... ah - yes - he's preventing Ukraine from taking its own territory by force!! Of course - how silly of me.......................
Well that's what happens when war is legal; some madmen will always decide why they must take their nations to war.
As for Taiwan: it's part of China, and recognized as such in the UN; which madmen will be the first to initiate a war over Taiwan?
Xi seems willing to accept 'One China 2 systems', will delusional "sovereign rights" democracy ideologues inside and outside Taiwan be responsible for initiating a war?