legal angle

[JoeG]

> >>Of course there is a hypocrisy factor. As Francis
> >>Boyle himself would point out, all of the countries concerned let Bosnia
> >>stew in its blood for years despite UN resolutions that called upon them
to
> >>act. In an area swarming with NATO troops, Mladic and Karadjic are free
> >>despite Srebrenica, which killed twice as many people as at the WTC.
>
> I've never understood what the bite of arguments like this is
> supposed to be. People *seem* to take statements like this as
> arguments that the U.S. shouldn't be dropping bombs on the Taliban.
> But the only conclusion I can draw from it is that NATO should have
> arrested (or killed) Mladic long ago...

It proves that NATO has no interest in things like human rights and
democracy.  Therefore, whenever they claim to be doing something on the
behalf of those ideas we know they are lying.  There must be some other
motivation - usually a more sinister and imperialist one.  Any arguement in
support of military action because of human rights or similar ideas is
rendered false because that is not the objective of said military action.

Joe