"I support the troops..." ???

trespassers will wrote:

dagmaraka wrote:
TW, how exactly did France and like-minded undermine the UN's credibility? By disagreeing with the U.S. position?

No, by refusing to back their own position as stated in 1441.

have to back up frankapisa here.

just the day before yesterday i saw a bbc world interview with mary robinson, former irish president and UN high commissioner for human rights. though backing off from calling the war illegal outright, she very clearly stated that 1441 was deliberately drafted in such a way that it would not be possible to use it as a justification for war as next step.

although its true that there is no consensus, many international law jurists do agree with the french about 1441 not being sufficient legal grounds for a war - can see them on TV every day (here, in any case).

0 Replies

Quote:

I understand your fervor for this war, Tresspasser, but overstating your case about France's motives doesn't help.

No, I don't think you do understand my fervor, and no, I have not overstated anything.

0 Replies

nimh, i have nothing to add. you spelled it out. if that is not clear enough, don't know what is. TW, sorry that so few understand your ferver, perhaps you can explain it better so that we do, instead of just saying 'no, you don't get it.' that is not a dialogue.

0 Replies

TW, although it does not belong quite here. I will likely stay a long time and am excited about that. I do like this country and respect its history and what it brought for the rest of the world. I hope that I do not have to agree with its current actions to be able to stay ;-)

0 Replies

nimh

As you certainly know, even the German conservatives, who are pro-war, deny this due to legal reasons.

0 Replies

This is the second time in as many weeks where I've been in a discussion with Tresspasser where he was unable or unwilling to acknowledge that he was wrong.

Hard-headed guy.

But I get a kick out of hard-headed people -- and these days, a laugh is something to appreciate.

So to Tresspasser -- Hey, guy! Thanks.

0 Replies

Quote:

This is the second time in as many weeks where I've been in a discussion with Tresspasser where he was unable or unwilling to acknowledge that he was wrong.

As Thomas Paine wrote in a letter to a friend regarding his work, The Age of Reason, "If I do not believe as you believe, it proves that you do not believe as I believe, and this is all that it proves."

Frank seems to believe that if you do not believe as he believes, it proves you are wrong. Rolling Eyes

(I'm going to stick with Paine on this one.)

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

nimh

As you certainly know, even the German conservatives, who are pro-war, deny this due to legal reasons.

Walter, would you elaborate on this? This is the first implication that German citizens are not permitted to disagree with a government position. Possibly, I'm misunderstanding what you have written.

0 Replies

roger, I'm almost sure Walter means, that even if they support the war for political reasons, they acknowledge that it is illegal, under the UN Chart.

0 Replies

That makes sense, fbaezer. You can imagine what I was thinking.

0 Replies

The question is: what do the German conservatives deny due to legal reasons?

0 Replies

Thanks, fbaezer, it's exactly what I meant!

(I should THINK a little bit more before writing/speaking in English: otherwise I might get some greater trouble than the next few days in London :wink:)

0 Replies

i wish i could go. you londonians and vicinity (including germany) a2k members look like a fun bunch!

0 Replies

dagmar

In Germany, public opinion has been consistently hostile to the idea of a military solution to the Iraq crisis.
The conservative CDU/CSU leaders are now openly supporting the US, however, they don't answer the question if they think this war was legal re international law. [Since even conservative law professors deny legalty, they have some problems. Mrs. Merkel's speech today in parliament gave a good proof. [Unfortunately no English to that.)]

0 Replies

Could you please post it, perhaps on some separate thread? I would be very interested to (try to) read it.

0 Replies

A summary (in English) about the complete view of German politicans re this topic is to be found here:

DW-WORLD.DE (English)

Some more:

Opposition Gives Schröder a Rhetorical Whipping

0 Replies

trespassers will wrote:

Quote:
This is the second time in as many weeks where I've been in a discussion with Tresspasser where he was unable or unwilling to acknowledge that he was wrong.

As Thomas Paine wrote in a letter to a friend regarding his work, The Age of Reason, "If I do not believe as you believe, it proves that you do not believe as I believe, and this is all that it proves."

Frank seems to believe that if you do not believe as he believes, it proves you are wrong. (I'm going to stick with Paine on this one.)

COMMENT:

I am an agnostic -- and I really don't get into that "believing" stuff.

In any case, I did not state a belief.

This interaction between us started when I refuted what you said about France.

I wrote:

"France's position was NEVER to immediately go to war over non-compliance or half-hearted compliance.

France, like Russia and China and several other non-permanent members of the Security Council, signed on to 1441 only when it was purged of any hint that immediate war would be the result of compliance problems.

So to say that France is refusing to back it's own position is absolutely incorrect. "

You were incorrect, Tresspasser.

Why not simply own up to your error instead of trying to side track the discussion?

That, at least, would be on topic.

0 Replies

That is a relief, Walter. Thanks

0 Replies

I see. So it is actually against the Grundgesetz for Germany to participate in an act of aggression, but Germany is legally obliged to fulfill its NATO obligations and participate. Same for Slovakia, Poland, Czech Republic, and others, where the sentiments are divided. Tough call. But dang it, why do we have to follow international law when the main superpower on this globe, that would like to serve as a shining example of democracy and the rule of law, does not! I guess we should abide by the principle: do not do onto others that you don't wish to be done to yourself and follow the law, especially since international law does have the precedence over the laws of individual countries. in theory.

0 Replies

"but Germany is legally obliged to fulfill its NATO obligations" - But Germany in not obliged in any case involving Iraq, unless, or untill Iraq invades Turkey, which is a part of the NATO orgaization.

Not that I favor the German position, but the obligation just does not exist.

0 Replies

"I support the troops..." ???

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know