Quote Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
action in the case of genocide is not optionable. it is not always implemented as the UN is a fat sweeling body of beuraucracy.

i actually did just say why the war was illegal. it was no apporved by the UN security council, was not an act in retiliation for aggression and was not response to genocide. so failed to meet all 3 of those standards. that makes it a war of aggression and so i illegal. you can't legalise a war just because you don't like what the UN says. the war was illegal as it failed to met preset standards of war. the un being the people who will try you for war crimes are the same people who decide what these crimes are. your war therefore was a crime and illegal.

i may ask why the people of halabja were your enemies?

and sasquatch if that guy did spill that soda intentionally then yes he breached your human rights.
"My war" was a crime and illegal? (Wait...a crime and illegal? Both? Wow.) Again. The action wasn't approved by the UN--mainly because the UN was controlled by corrupt parties, but still--so you think that makes it illegal? The UN wasn't doing their job. So the U.S. had to. Should the U.S. have to be the world's police force? Hell no. But somebody's got to, because the UN is too damn yellow to do what they were set up to do--and, I'd like to point out, when they do try to take action, they usually fail miserably at it. If the only legal military action is action that the UN approves, why doesn't every country just sign their entire military over to the UN, and let the UN control all of it? Genius idea, huh?

Action in the case of genocide is notoptionable? They why hasn't the UN stepped in to control all those other cases that have been deemed as genocide?

and sasquatch if that gud did spill that soda intentionally then yes he breached your human rights.
This may quite possibly be the funniest thing I've heard for quite a while. You sure do know how to make people laugh.