Iran... ok, now we have a problem.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by DanaC

The two do not equate. Nobody tried to sell the action in Yugoslavia as a response to the threat they posed, or their role in 9/11. The Bush administration did try to sell action in Iraq as a response to the threat they supposedly posed and their supposed role in 9/11.

Yugoslavia wasn't a threat, but it's OK since it wasn't SOLD as a threat.

Iraq was more of a threat than Yugoslavia, by anyone's measure, but it's NOT OK since it was sold as a threat.

Not sure I follow.

If international law recognised dictatorship as a valid reason for invading and occupying a country we would have far more wars than we currently do.

Thus, Yugoslavia was illegal and unjustified.

If the invasion had happened directly after Kuwait, it could have been justified imo.....if it had happened directly after the gassing of the Kurds it could have been justified (soon as someone uses the genocide word, international law allows for action). If the assistance which had been offered to the opposition in Iraq had actually been forthcoming when they attempted to overthrow their dictator, that would have been entirely justified, as that would have been assisting the people in their own self-determination.

What does "international law" say about a statute of limitations on gassing people? How much time has to pass before they got away with it?

Does bin Laden face a similar deadline? If a decade passes and he hasn't been caught, does he get away too?