obedience4:



The resolution is base on interpretation, depending on how you want to interpret it and on what context you are looking at when interpreting it

The key word is "necessary measures" the US were enforcing a no-fly zone but later started conducting airstrike in support of some anti government elements on the basis that this were "necessary measures" to prevent civilians deaths. NATO agurement is that they had to start conducting airstrike on governments forces loyal to Gaddafi to prevent civilians casualties.
This airstrike and support were vital to Gaddafi loss of power and eventually his death. If the airstrikes actually prevented civilians deaths or was just a means or smoke screen to remove Gaddafi it is hard to tell.

The bottom line of the whole matter is NATO acted on a legal framework which was backed by the UNSC resolution for NATO to use all "necessary measures" to secure and protect civilians, "necessary measures" can mean anything from airstrike to lunching a nuke depending on the interpretation and the context being used.

A perfect example is Russia, one of the reasons which putin gave for invading Ukraine was that they were protecting Russian speaking people in the dobass region, this is Russia virtually invading another nation because it feels its protecting civilians, someone looking at that context will Putin invading Ukraine was a"necessary measure" to protect ethic Russians in the dombass, THIS IS NONSENSE because
No Russian speaking person was being persecuted or killed in the dombass.


There is enough of proof on the chemical attack by government forces in Syria there was a global outcry after pictures and videos circulated after the attacks, and trump conducted airstrike on chemical weapons facilities In Syria, this was major news


I am not in support of the airstrike in Libya, but nothing they did was illegal, it was conducted by virtue of the UNSC resolution, infact nigeria was a non permanent member then and they voted yes.

Watcharena:
what ever you think of Libya is upto youv,now explain to us which law authorise US to occupy syria even against their wish

obedience4:



This message you quoting is not for you dude, that's way above your pay grade


The same law that brought Iran and turkey into Syria is the same law that brought the US into Syria
Have addressed this issue with a respected gentleman on this thread, read up.

obedience4:


Read my post well, I never said there was a defence pact with Kuwait, I said their defense was under the the US, the UN security Council which included both Russia and China pass a resolution which allow the use of force against Iraq, the Kuwaiti government ask for help the US government accepted and the defence of Kuwaiti was brought under the US.

obedience4:


Read my post well, I never said there was a defence pact with Kuwait, I said their defense was under the the US, the UN security Council which included both Russia and China pass a resolution which allow the use of force against Iraq, the Kuwaiti government ask for help the US government accepted and the defence of Kuwaiti was brought under the US.

0m0luabi:
this one want to cry 😂 😂

obedience4:
First of all technically the US have no offical diplomatic relations with Taiwan, the US as many other countries have adopted the one China policy making the PRC the only legitimate government.,how will the USA signed a defence Treaty with a Taiwan nation, when the same US recognises the communist government of the peoples Republic of China as the only one government in both China and Taiwan, the only thing the US can do which it has done well is enabling the Taiwanese making sure they possess the technology and tools it requires to defend itself.

Like I pointed out, the Ukraine has always been on under the influence of Russia, and it was only after the revolution that brought a pro western government, thus there wasn't enough ground work to bring Ukraine into a US defense pact

Cuba is a Russia ally, we all know how the US reacted the last time the Soviet Union tried to use Cuba to counter US influence in North America, how many defence pacts dose Russia have with countries that are anti US,?

When I see your nuclear rants on this thread, i just laughed, it shows how shallow your thinking is, and it seems you are missing some neurons in that your underdeveloped brain of yours. Pakistan is the country known to have the least stockpiles of Nukes yet Pakistan has enough nukes to destroy the entire world ten times over, and you are F00lishly threatening a USA who currently have one of the largest stockpiles of nukes, A country who has indeed used one, a nation who currently has over 7 nuclear armed subs lurking in the oceans ready at a moment notice to bring down hell, you are the most dullest fellow I have seen, stick to copy and paste propaganda .

OkpaNsukkaisBae:
they came to Kursk, they didn't go back alive

Allthelight:


Most of russian soldiers are in eastern ukraine..

For russia to stop this offensive they have to move equipment and soldiers..

Which are in eastern ukraine.

Allthelight:
so my theory is better than the propaganda posted by some here.

FoolishBoy419:


Let's be honest. Morally, this is wrong. But I would do the same if I were a Palestinian. This is nothing compared to the terrorism they've been facing at the hands of this genocidal state.

WritterNg:
⚡China has proposed a 3-step plan for Palestine:

1- A ceasefire will be reached in Gaza as soon as possible.

2- Palestinians will govern Palestine.

3- The two-state solution will be implemented.

obedience4:



I think you should read more about the UNSC resolution 1973, there is a major resolution which states and I quote
authorizes "all necessary measures [...] to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory"

Gaddafi was instigator in chief of the killings in Libya he was responsible for the mass murder in Libya and removing him from power was a "necessary measure" to mitigate against the senseless killings of civilians. You saying it was offensive operation instead of a defensive operations doesn't matters
it all about how you defined the phrase "necessary measures" dose military operations were deemed necessary to prevent civilians casualties, the UNSC gave the go ahead for the USA and Co to used any means to prevent civilians deaths, and removing Gaddafi was deem a necessary measure.

During the peak of the civil war, the Syria government had collapse, the country was in ruins and ISIS took advantage and became a formidable force, note isis killed American citizens, beheading them on live videos, invaded iraq which houses US bases with US citizens, iraq hosted USA consulate with American citizens,so the US should fold its hands till its citizens are killed, this is not about Borders The US was there to protect it interests, same as Iran, same as Turkey and also Russia.

The USA had to do what it needed to crub isis, during isis regin of terror they were able to carry out attacks on Europe and even had an affiliation with a splinter cell of boko haram in West Africa, they had took vast amount of territorial gains were involved in young girls trade. The intervention of the US was necessary to counter the rise of ISIS's, and without the US intervention nobody knows how far ISIS' would have gone.

US occupying oil rich areas and using Syria oil is mere propaganda, this are folklore, tales by moonlight

WritterNg:
⚡Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko stated in an interview that Armenia should focus on developing its economy and relying on its own resources, as no one else will support them.

Lukashenko also claimed that some post-Soviet countries seek to take advantage of Russia without offering anything in return. He made these remarks in an interview with the "Russia" TV channel, where he called for unity among CIS countries and criticized some members for their unfair attitude toward Russia.

He emphasized that there will come a time when CIS countries will turn to Russia and Belarus for help again. "Who in America or the EU is waiting for products from Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan? No one. And Armenia? Besides us, who needs it? Nobody. Let them develop their economy and rely on their own resources. What France or Macron? Tomorrow, Macron will be gone, and everyone will forget about Armenia," Lukashenko stated.

mysticwarrior:


So why haven’t the same UN security council passed a resolution to allow the use of force against Russia for invading Ukraine? The Ukrainian government has been crying for help, why is the UN Security Council silent over Ukraine’s cry for help?

WritterNg:
🇷🇺 🤝🏻 🇨🇳

Vic2023:
The USA said they invaded Iraq because it possesses nuclear weapons. You are here under the pretense of defending a visa, but say otherwise. Na slave you be!

obedience4:



The resolution is base on interpretation, depending on how you want to interpret it and on what context you are looking at when interpreting it

The key word is "necessary measures" the US were enforcing a no-fly zone but later started conducting airstrike in support of some anti government elements on the basis that this were "necessary measures" to prevent civilians deaths. NATO agurement is that they had to start conducting airstrike on governments forces loyal to Gaddafi to prevent civilians casualties.
This airstrike and support were vital to Gaddafi loss of power and eventually his death. If the airstrikes actually prevented civilians deaths or was just a means or smoke screen to remove Gaddafi it is hard to tell.

The bottom line of the whole matter is NATO acted on a legal framework which was backed by the UNSC resolution for NATO to use all "necessary measures" to secure and protect civilians, "necessary measures" can mean anything from airstrike to lunching a nuke depending on the interpretation and the context being used.

A perfect example is Russia, one of the reasons which putin gave for invading Ukraine was that they were protecting Russian speaking people in the dobass region, this is Russia virtually invading another nation because it feels its protecting civilians, someone looking at that context will Putin invading Ukraine was a"necessary measure" to protect ethic Russians in the dombass, THIS IS NONSENSE because
No Russian speaking person was being persecuted or killed in the dombass.


There is enough of proof on the chemical attack by government forces in Syria there was a global outcry after pictures and videos circulated after the attacks, and trump conducted airstrike on chemical weapons facilities In Syria, this was major news


I am not in support of the airstrike in Libya, but nothing they did was illegal, it was conducted by virtue of the UNSC resolution, infact nigeria was a non permanent member then and they voted yes.

Kremlingrad:


Nothing special. Just a regular meeting between a master (China) and it's vassal (Russia).