Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

The Commons Bar Mk XII - MHoC Chat Thread watch

Announcements
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Just wanted to say that Bornblue's posting on the last couple of pages has been excellent.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I hope that Rory Stewart gets promoted in the new cabinet to come, he's very impressive and accomplished.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Saying 'I don't care' about the legality of it, does not make it legal.
    You base the legality on UNSCR 1441 which does not authorize the unilateral use of force.

    1441 imposes an obligation on Iraq to comply with weapons inspections. It was for the SC alone to determine whether there had been a material breach and authorize the use of force.
    It's for a court of law to decide these things, I just read an article where legal professor disagree about the power of the 1441 resolution. It'd be factually incorrect to call him a war criminal until he is found guilty.

    I dont know whether the war was legal or not. I havent read the resolution. Better trained people than me disagree about it.

    What is absolutely clear to me is that this is an abstract semantic debate and whomever wins that semantic debate, it has no bearing whatsoever on the morality of the situation.

    Rules can should be bent when better outcomes can be achieved by doing so, and where the morality of doing so is consistent with adequate political philosophical principles.

    Following the letter of a law which is immoral, based on the fact it is a law, is not an adequate theory of political philosophy in my opinion. Any law which stops you doing the right thing because putin says no is an immoral law.

    Debate me on that last point, because I don't have a horse in the race of its legality. You keep giving me legal assertions I cannot verify, without realising that it does not affect my argument; my position is entirely outside the paramitres of "whether it was legal or not".
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    out of interest here is an independent who thinks its legal:

    http://www.headoflegal.com/2010/01/2...-the-iraq-war/

    Again, i dont have a horse in the legality race, but ive just googled it a bit and it seems to be at least arguable that there is a legal basis.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    It's for a court of law to decide these things, I just read an article where legal professor disagree about the power of the 1441 resolution. It'd be factually incorrect to call him a war criminal until he is found guilty.

    I dont know whether the war was legal or not. I havent read the resolution. Better trained people than me disagree about it.

    What is absolutely clear to me is that this is an abstract semantic debate and whomever wins that semantic debate, it has no bearing whatsoever on the morality of the situation.

    Rules can should be bent when better outcomes can be achieved by doing so, and where the morality of doing so is consistent with adequate political philosophical principles.

    Following the letter of a law which is immoral, based on the fact it is a law, is not an adequate theory of political philosophy in my opinion. Any law which stops you doing the right thing because putin says no is an immoral law.

    Debate me on that last point, because I don't have a horse in the race of its legality. You keep giving me legal assertions I cannot verify, without realising that it does not affect my argument; my position is entirely outside the paramitres of "whether it was legal or not".
    I didn't aim to get into a debate about the merits of the war or the justification, but rather its legality. I thoroughly believe in the rule of international law and if our Prime Minister violated international law he should be held accountable.

    To save you time, SC Resolution 1441 gave Iraq 'a final opportunity' to comply with its disarmament obligations, ie weapons inspections.
    However, nowhere did it authorise states to unilaterally use force on Iraq. Any force legally had to be authorised by the UNSC.

    I don't like a lot of our politicians who make our laws, it doesn't mean I can or should ignore the laws they make. I can't just decide to ignore the law on theft because I think theft is moral or justified to steal and the same should apply in the international sphere.

    If we want to stop barbaric countries using force on others then we too must comply by those same rules.

    Blair took us into an illegal war. That may well legally constitutes an act of aggression and as such he should be charged.
    What standing do we have to tell the likes of Syria and North Korea to abide by international law if we do not do so ourselves?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    What standing do we have to tell the likes of Syria and North Korea to abide by international law if we do not do so ourselves?
    Didn't you know? It's one rule for us, and another for everyone we disapprove of.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Westminster voting intention:
    CON: 36%
    LAB: 32%
    UKIP: 12%
    LDEM: 9%
    (via Survation, phone / 04 - 05 Jul)

    Green was not an option, so Labour and LD may well be overstated

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Not the first time that there has been an attempt to forget the Greens. *There is also a party with 56 MPs in the Commons and another with 9 forgotten, as well as Plaid Cymru.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Not the first time that there has been an attempt to forget the Greens. *There is also a party with 56 MPs in the Commons and another with 9 forgotten, as well as Plaid Cymru.
    No one cares about the greens.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    No one cares about the greens.
    Who are you again?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Not the first time that there has been an attempt to forget the Greens. *There is also a party with 56 MPs in the Commons and another with 9 forgotten, as well as Plaid Cymru.
    Nationalists tend to get their own option that is omitted from tweets

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Didn't you know? It's one rule for us, and another for everyone we disapprove of.
    You make the mistake of viewing them as our equals. If they try attack another nation we have the power to stop them.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Leadsom apparently held a press conference lasting all of 4 minutes with no specific policy other than to say 'prosperity, not austerity'.

    Arghhhhhhhh. Where's the hope for fiscal discipline gone!
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    China can be added to the list of parties interested in a trade deal more we've voted to leave the EU

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...y-of-an-early/

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Lol, the Labour Mp on the Daily Politics seems to think Hussein was worse than Stalin

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I hope that Rory Stewart gets promoted in the new cabinet to come, he's very impressive and accomplished.
    Agreed. His career prior to entering parliament is quite remarkable as well.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Introducing the Leadsomites: https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/stat...rc=twsrc%5Etfw :facepalm:

    There are also significant deviations from her claimed positions in the city. Her claimed status as a Managing Director at a hedge fund looks to be a Marketing Director position in reality. Invesco Perpetual also have caught her out on claiming to be their Chief Investment Officer when in reality she was deputised to that position and had no-one reporting to her. The same story with Barclays where she claimed to be Financial Institutions Director when again she was deputised to that position.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    New bar huh? Nice to see it's not changed that much! Now, who's in my seat... shoo, shoo! I'll be wanting that back thanks!

    Double vodka and coke please barman . Time to get this show on the road
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    New bar huh? Nice to see it's not changed that much! Now, who's in my seat... shoo, shoo! I'll be wanting that back thanks!

    Double vodka and coke please barman . Time to get this show on the road
    Welcome back.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    Welcome back.
    Thank you Drink?

    Love the signature by the way, did you make it yourself or is it a new party effort?
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Thank you Drink?

    Love the signature by the way, did you make it yourself or is it a new party effort?
    I always assumed you were going to do a birk... Good luck getting back into labour...
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 15, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.