yeah those arms deals are very counterproductive to Europe's interests.Originally Posted by BasketCase
yeah those arms deals are very counterproductive to Europe's interests.
Corruption is a serious impediment to civil liberties.
We've been lax because we don't enforce these violations and we've been soft because even when we do it's with nothing more than a slap on the wrist if even that. And no I'm not exactly familiar with that term.
Subdiscipline in what? chemistry or international law.
They do have that effect/intention even externally, most of today's international law regarding warfare is based on the Geneva convention which was written to ensure that the sort of atrocities that took place during WWII would not happen again, and here I'm talking more about the firebombings of Dresden, the nuking of Hiroshima & Nagasaki etc(deliberate targeting of civilians as a means of achieving military objectives) rather than the holocaust. And largely it's been quite effective at decreasing the usage civilian targets in war, take the Falklands for example, The UK could just as well have decided to bomb the capital of Argentina into submission instead, it would probably have been quite effective.
I see where you're going with that. The ban was from holding any sort of public office so that more than likely includes any sort of higher official and not just public office
Agreed, it's just that I think that the laws here can be there to support and justify political action, for example the 2nd Iraq war which lacked any such justification and later was heavily criticized for that fact compared with the NATO actions in former Yugoslavia where they did have such justifications and even a UN mandate to support their actions.
Technically there wasn't even anything wrong with that piece of paper, what was wrong with it was that the UK basically gave away Czechoslovakia to Hitler.
Well it seems that multilateral action is on it's way since EU slowly seems to be joining the US in sanctions and criticism, I doubt we'll ever get China in on this so that's about as far as multilateral action is possible, the best we can accomplish is to blockade anything moving into Russia from the west whether it is by air sea or land. But considering that most of Russia's population is concentrated in the west that should go a long way if the west can just agree on a roadmap for action.
I'm not all that familiar with Suharto, my Indonesian history is quite rusty :P
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Not really, there was a ban on flying lower than 8000 meters because until now it was generally accepted that any higher than that was safe because targeting aircraft at such heights requires advanced and sophisticated equipment previously assumed to be limited to states, which generally have systems in place to prevent this type of accidents. The fault lies primarily with the rebels who didn't care enough to bother to differentiate between military and civilian targets, which is an absolute obligation of anybody acting as a military force, it's their responsibility to ensure beyond any doubt that the target they're shooting at isn't civilian in nature.
I have to disagree with that, sure the rebels needs anti-aircraft missiles since Ukraine has aircraft's and they do not. However this uprising is an internal matter and Russia has no business getting involved, generally people call Iran a terrorist state because they send arms to Hezbollah and Hamas, Russia is no different in that regard at the moment.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Exactly how do you intend to enforce it and go further and harsher? Armed conflict? I wouldn't say that's a bright idea. I think noone wants WW3.
for example a subdisclipine in chemistry is organic chemistry. At least in the Netherlands it is, not sure how it would work where you're at. And if you were in international law, no offense but i'd stick to chemistry if I were you ;) btw I would have guessed physics ;)
btw are you aware of what a catalyst is? In economics we have a catalyst too.
it is and it isn't. most jurisprudence is based for instance on the international law courts. As to what precendence and basis judges look for, some of it is based on the Geneva convention, but more I would say is based on the universal declaration of human rights and another important one is the nuremberg principles.
Look quoting international law against tyrants and their subjects achieves nothing, because noone is listening. That's due to propaganda but also the singular mindset people have when a hostile atmosphere exists. Once the tyrant is defeated, its people have the ability to listen when the trial is taking place. You judge afterwards, not beforehand like a preacher. Democracy is based on the trias politica (or for the Americans checks and balances), that is the seperation of the executive, legislative and judiciary power. When you let members of the executive branch quote laws beforehand such a seperation does not exist. For example were you to judge about slander beforehand it leads to censorship and the absence of free speech. Now that's why quoting international law doesn't make for a convincing argument, if you were the free world to give a good example to the Russians.
As to the effectiveness of multilateral embargo and international courts. It is a stick that works. It is incredibly slow and perhaps not very effective, but I would say it works. However I would also say that a carrot (inclusion into something like the EU) works better. I could only point the former Yugoslav countries as an example. Wretched civil war, and the region divided, but nowadays there isn't armed conflict going on.
and they gave it away for nothing, because bottomline quoting laws to tyrants achieves nothing. So technically there is everything wrong with that piece of paper. Quoting laws is vanity and it is not impressing, especially not as a bargaining tool for peace and prosperity.
strategically it would not have been effective, so i disagree again
perhaps you should look some of that up. ;) it makes for a compelling argument for multilateral aid, and if you want to take it a step further, also for multilateral embargo. If you read about it, keep the catalyst in mind. ;)
Last edited by freemehul; 25-07-2014 at 18:59.
Corruption is a serious impediment to civil liberties.
are rebel forces really held to any kind of war terms? Like lets be serious...
They are violating laws just by being in war why does it matter what they do...
Russia selling/providing arms to further there interests in the ukraine is clearly lame but similar things have always been done by major players :(
My life is better then yours.
Yeah I'm just saying that the reason that ICAO didn't close the airspace was because it was believed that only states could possess the type of equipment necessary to shoot down an aircraft at 10,000 meters and that they'd act in a responsible manner to avoid things like this.
Of course nobody would expect the rebels to abide by anything, as you say they're already fighting an "illegal war" so there's no reason to believe they'd behave in a civilized manner.
Yes it's been a recurring theme throughout history unfortunately, and it's likely to stay that way
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
I'm not talking about this conflict, it's obvious we can't do much more than completely isolate Russia unless we're willing to start WWIII. I meant earlier in history, for example the Genocide in Rwanda, we knew it was happening and we did nothing until it was too late, the balkan wars, too little too late. All these minor conflicts in Africa where we do nothing because hey, it's Africa and nobody gives a f*ck about Africa. Another example is Israel, we could and should have censored/embargoed them a hundred times in the past 60 years but because they're friends with the US that hasn't happened.
If the world had been consequent about enforcing and punishing these laws we put down so that there'd be no doubt in Putin's mind that there would be widespread and crippling international sanctions then the current situation could probably have been avoided. Right now Putin thinks he can get away with it because he expects the EU to be too weak to impose sanctions because many of it's nations are too dependent on Russian cocai... err natural gas.
Now we're here and we can only play with the hand we built over the past 60 years, so the question is when are we going to say that enough is enough? What happens when Putin fans the flames of "revolution" in Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania who percentually have a much larger russian speaking population than Ukraine(in Estonia they amount to roughly 30%), what then?
The question is can we avoid WWIII at this point and if we could then what would the price be?
Yeah organic chem is probably one of my favourite disciplines in chem because you can do pretty much everything with it. And yes of course I know what a catalyst is, it's a pretty basic concept in chemistry.
Hell no, physics is too much math for my taste and too theoretical :P
True.
I agree that quoting laws of any kind doesn't work with tyrants, hell, quoting international law doesn't even work with supposed democracies like Israel for example -_-
As to the effectiveness of multilateral embargo and international courts. It is a stick that works. It is incredibly slow and perhaps not very effective, but I would say it works. However I would also say that a carrot (inclusion into something like the EU) works better. I could only point the former Yugoslav countries as an example. Wretched civil war, and the region divided, but nowadays there isn't armed conflict going on.
Your argument on separation of powers is of course true on the national level, on the other hand international law is outside the jurisdiction of national government, so the same argument doesn't hold water in that case, so members of the executive can safely quote/refer to international law and it's something they've been doing a lot recently.
The problem was that it wasn't theirs to give away, the piece of paper or the tyrants has nothing to do with it, the ****ty part is that they gave away a piece of another nation without that nation having a say in the matter.
Decimating civilian population centers has been an effective means throughout history, if you wipe out their major population centers it would amongst other things have forced them to redeploy their military and secondarily it would have had a huge impact on the morale of both the military and the general public, take the nukings of Japan for example.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Why can't Russia just has Eastern Europe? Stop the bloodshed!
theHERETICS - Brute Force - Sonata - Dreams - The Pulsing Trollfags - The Expendables
Visit my home for banned, neglected, and otherwise disenfranchised players on Discord!
Why can't Russia leave sovereign nations alone? And no, lets lot leave the despots and tyrants to their own schemes, the last time we did that WWII happened.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
maybe they wish to expand their borders?
My life is better then yours.
EU adopts tough new sanctions on Russia
By JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG - AP
BRUSSELS (AP) — Frustrated by the apparent ineffectiveness of previous sanctions and outraged by the deaths of 298 people aboard the Malaysia Airlines plane downed over eastern Ukraine, the European Union adopted tough new economic sanctions against Russia on Tuesday, EU officials and diplomats said.
The measures, which were prepared in coordination with the United States, include an arms embargo, and a ban on the sale of dual use and sensitive technologies, such as advanced energy technology equipment relevant for deep sea and Arctic drilling. Such equipment will now be subject to prior approval by competent national authorities, an EU official said.
Under the financial sanctions, Russian state-owned banks will be banned from selling bonds or equities with a maturity of over 90 days in European capital markets, the sources said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to make public statements.
The ambassadors also added eight names to the list of people subject to EU-wide asset freezes and travel bans, including four people close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, the EU official said. They also put three more entities on the list of companies and organizations subject to EU sanctions because of their alleged actions against Ukraine's sovereignty or territorial integrity, that official said.
Europe, which has a much bigger trade relationship with Russia than the U.S., had lagged behind Washington in its earlier punitive measures, in part out of concern from leaders that the penalties could hurt their own economies. But on Monday, in a rare videoconference call with President Barack Obama, the leaders of Britain, Germany, Italy and France expressed their willingness to adopt new sanctions against Russia in coordination with the U.S., an official French statement said.
Until now, the trade bloc has only targeted specific individuals, businesses or rebel groups.
"We welcome these early indications that European countries are going to take additional steps today," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Tuesday, adding that the U.S. expects those penalties will "track pretty closely" with previous sector sanctions announced by the Obama administration.
Earnest said further U.S. penalties would be announced "as soon as today."
The Western nations are demanding Russia halt the alleged supply of arms to Ukrainian separatists and other actions that destabilize the situation in eastern Ukraine.
The EU measures were decided at a meeting of ambassadors from the bloc's 28 member countries. They will be codified in legal language and published Thursday, when they will take immediate effect. The new names to be added to the travel ban and assets freeze list should be known Wednesday.
"The approach will be under constant review and can be adjusted in light of new developments. Normally sanctions are in place for one year," the EU official said.
Yes and so did Hitler and why should we let them?
It's better that we make a stand now where we can afford to be slow about it(because Ukraine is only our problem as long as we choose to make it our problem) rather than when he takes the next step and starts this sorta **** in a NATO or EU nation because then we'd have WWIII 5 minutes later. If Ukraine had been in EU or NATO WWIII would have already started months ago.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Rebels lay mines near crash site
DONETSK, Ukraine (AP) — International observers turned back Wednesday after making another attempt to reach the site where Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 went down in eastern Ukraine, and a government official said the area near the zone had been mined by pro-Russian separatists who control it.
Observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe set out in two vehicles — without frustrated crash investigators from the Netherlands who have been trying to reach the site for four days.
The OSCE observers headed back to the city of Donetsk after discussions with rebels on the city's outskirts not long after starting what would have been a two-hour journey to the site.
That means that almost two weeks after the July 17 disaster, safety concerns and hindrance from the separatists who control the area are still obstructing access to the site. Foreign governments whose citizens died have complained the site is still not secured and some human remains have not been recovered. International observers say wreckage has been cut, moved or otherwise tampered with.
Government security spokesman Andriy Lysenko added to those concerns Wednesday by saying separatists "have mined the approaches to this area. This makes the work of the international experts impossible."
Lysenko was asked at a briefing about concerns that Ukrainian efforts to win back territory were increasing fighting in the area and slowing access. He said that Ukrainian troops weren't conducting operations against separatists near the site, but were trying to cut off their supply lines to force them to leave the area.
OSCE observers did not immediately tell journalists accompanying them what specific issue made them turned back.
The U.S. and Ukrainian governments say the Boeing 777 was shot down by a missile fired from areas controlled by pro-Russian separatists who have been fighting the Ukrainian government. The separatists deny shooting down the plane; Russia denies providing the Buk missile launcher and says the Ukrainian military may have shot the plane down.
Elsewhere, Ukrainian forces took control of the town of Avdeevka, just to the north of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. The town is near the airport, which has been fought over for weeks by rebels and government forces. Local officials said fighting over the past 24 hours killed 19 people in the region.
Ukrainian forces continue to encircle Horlivka, another key town northeast of Donetsk. The city of Donetsk is one of the main strongholds for the insurrection in the east and taking Horlivka would open the way to move against Donetsk, the Ukrainian military has said.
This pattern of behavior is borderline. Everyone already knows the rebels shot the plane down with systems they got from Russia. I'm not sure what they have to gain at this point from keeping investigators away and being defiant about it. I doubt they're acting on direct orders from Moscow, but still, it's sickening and stupid.
Anything short of hard incontrovertible evidence is just suspicions, so as long as they can keep stalling the investigation they and Russia can keep up the denial game. Sickening, yes, Stupid, no.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote