How can the U.S. accuse Russia of violating international laws????

[Lodestar]

Walk the talk.

---

If you want to make moral or legal pronouncements, or to condemn bad behavior, you have to be a moral, law-abiding person yourself. It is laughable when we see someone like Rush Limbaugh criticizing drug addicts or a corrupt politician like former Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) voting for more prisons, more cops, and tougher rules against appeals of sentences.

The same thing applies to nations.

And when it comes to hypocritical nations that make pious criticisms of other countries about the “rule of law” and the sanctity of “international law,” it’s hard to find a better laughing stock than the United States of America.

After invading Iraq illegally in 2003, with no sanction from the UN, and no imminent threat being posed by that country to either the US or to any of Iraq’s neighbors, after years of launching bombing raids, special forces assaults and drone-fired missile launches into countries like Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, and killing hundreds of innocent men, women and children, after illegally capturing and holding, without charge or trial, hundreds of people it accuses of being terrorists and illegal combatants, after torturing thousands of captives, the US now accuses Russia of violating international law by sending troops into Crimea to protect a Russian population threatened by a violently anti-Russian Ukrainian government just installed in a coup.

MORE
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/04/how-can-the-us-accuse-russia-of-violating-international-law/

[Scootaloo]

1. Something can be hypocritical, but still be factual

We certainly have no room to moralize on the subject... but if Russia is breaking internationa law, then it is, regardless of hwther we are as well.

[JayhawkSD]

9. Point taken, but...

...who appointed us to stop them?

When bank robbers are robbing a bank, it is not other bank robbers who are responsible for stopping them. We would, in fact, laugh ourselves silly if other bank robbers who were not, at the moment, robbing banks started screaming their heads off about the "wrongness" of the actions of the active bank robbers. We would not say that it is the province of the non-active bank robbers to punish the active nank robbers for their actions.

And yet we decry the "wrongness" of the actions of nations who do what we have been doing for decades, and we pronounce that we will punish them for doing it. That makes no sense.

[yurbud]

11. great analogy. the second group of bank robbers would be pissed because the first group's bank was

going to be their next target.

Or likely they got stopped at a red light and the other guys just barely beat them there.

[PosterChild]

27. This is the central dilemma...

... sometimes called the "prisoner's dilemma". It was first identified by Thomas Hobbes in his Leviathan.

All governments exist in a state of anarchy with respect to each other. There is no over-arching power that defines and implements (enforces) justice for them. Under these conditions it is necessary (and thus permissible) for each nation to interpret and propagate its conception of justice and defend it and its interests in the world at large.

[JayhawkSD]

39. How about the "international law"

to which Obama keeps referring? The one which Russia is violating and we, somehow, are not.

Or the United Nations? Or the International Criminal Courts? Or the Geneva Convention? Or half a dozen other world-wide international treaties?

[PosterChild]

40. These legal instruments...

... international law, the Geneva convention, the other world-wide international treaties, have no over-arching interpretive and enforcement authority. Each nation / state is free, within the limits of its own power and resources, to interpret the (so called) "international law" or "treaty" as it sees fit and to act accordingly.

This is why both Russia and the United States believe, or at least claim to believe, that "international law" is on their side, and continue to pursue their interests accordingly.

The United Nations and the International Criminal Courts have no intrinsic authority or coercive power to interpret and to enforce their standard of "international law". In fact, there is no "THEIR" there. They are simply forums for discussion amongst nations, creating a "hub and spoke" communications structure that facilitates international diplomacy without doing anything in particular to resolve the inherent problem of a Hobbseian "War of all against all".

Like the Pope, the United Nations has ZERO divisions.

As Kant said, there is no such thing as a TREATY. Every so called "treaty" is in reality just a TRUCE. And until there is an over-whelming power in the world that can make and ENFORCE law over the various nations / states (a real SUPER power), that will remain the reality. Like it or not.

[sabrina 1]

13. Calling something factual when the accusations are coming from those who lied

us into a devastating tragic, brutal, illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, using torture, WMDs and propaganda in which our Corporate media fully participated, is amusing to say the least.

What International Laws has Russia broken and please do not use Western Media which has zero credibility anywhere other than among our Western Allies, and then mostly among the leaders of those nations? I have no clue,do you?

But to say that those who broke so many laws are going to be even listened to when talking about breaking International Laws is ludicrous.

Maybe if we had not moved forward from our own war criminals, violators of national and International Laws, someone somewhere might take us seriously.

We have zero moral authority a fact that is constantly pointed out around the world. Until we attempt to restore the Rule of Law here, it would be better if we stopped pointing fingers elsewhere, it just reminds the rest of the world of our own egregious war crimes.

[PosterChild]

28. We, and the EU, have the greatest moral authority that there is...

... the moral authority of liberal Western democracy. And America is the first and foremost defender of the principles of liberal Western democracy in this world. Principles such as "the rule of law" which you mention, which is very much needed in Ukraine and which is very much endangered by Russia's aggressive adventurism.

[sabrina 1]

30. You're kidding right? Ask the Iraqi people, the people of Afghanistan, torture??? Does

that ring a bell? I guess if we only torture and kill non-White European people, you might have a point.

Talk to the people of Latin America where we supported the likes of Pol Pot and Pinnochet to mention only two of the many Dictators we have shamefully supported, and STILL DO.

Ever heard of Karamov of Uzbekistan, the Saudi Royals, Bahrain's brutal leaders, not to mention all the African Dictators supported and installed by the that bastion of 'democratic principles' and our closest ally, the British Empire.

Have you checked out the 'democracy' we and our NATO allies created in Iraq lately? Spoken to any of the mothers of dead children in Pakistan, Yemen? Or do those people not rise to the level of being deserving of human rights for some reason?

We have NO RULE OF LAW in this country for War Criminals. Unless of course you think the Bush Gang of War Criminals had the right to invade and bomb a sovereign nation with their NATO allies, lie about their motives, 'mushroom clouds, 9/11' then torture and kill and maim and drive out of their own country, millions of innocent civilians.

Like I said, we and NATO are now viewed as the biggest threat to world peace by most countries in the world.

[PosterChild]

37. And yet...

RE: we and NATO are now viewed as the biggest threat to world peace by most countries in the world.

And yet, there would be far more war and far less peace in this world without us.

(Not to quibble, but Pol Pot was a communist revolutionary and leader of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.)

[Cayenne]

32. pot kettle again

What was our role in supporting the overthrow of a democratic government, just months before elections?

[PosterChild]

38. Are you Referring to the Ukraine maidan?

Our role there was to subsidize a series of human rights film festivals. I mean, who could have told they would actually take that "human rights" stuff so seriously?

National Endowment for Democracy, Ukraine

Kherson City Association of Journalists "South"
Human Rights, $42,429

Promoting Human Rights through a Traveling Film Festival

To raise public awareness of human rights. The Association will organize the traveling version of its 10th annual human rights film festival, Docudays UA, in 24 regions of Ukraine. The traveling festival will feature 25 domestic and international human rights documentary films and will include over 260 public discussions, seminars, performances and debates led by human rights activists and NGO representatives.

Kherson City Association of Journalists "South"
Human Rights, $31,195

Promoting Human Rights through a Documentary Film Festival

To cover the partial costs of its 10th annual human rights film festival, Docudays UA. The theme of this year’s anniversary festival is ‘Vybor – Yest!’ (There is a Choice!). The unique event will again feature domestic and international human rights documentary films and will include public discussions and debates led by human-rights NGO representatives and experts. Endowment support will be used to cover part of the festivals’ seven-day inauguration in Kyiv in March 2013.

Independent Association of Broadcasters
Human Rights, $44,875

Promoting Youth Human Rights Awareness

To raise awareness of human rights, protect freedom of speech, and educate youth about the role of media in democratic society. The Association will organize its fourth annual Kinomedia Festival, which will include film screenings and public lectures at universities in nine Ukrainian cities. The Association will also conduct a short film contest, focusing on media freedom, democracy and human rights, for students and young professionals from throughout Ukraine.

[Niceguy1]

2. when the us claims

A part of mexico, or Canada as their own then maybe. But we havent so we have a right to disparage Russia

[Lodestar]

4. Well there is more than one way to 'take' a country/land/property/resources...

For instance one can install their own bogus leaders within newly dismantled governments....kind of what corporations have done
to the U.S. government. Coups are like corporate takeovers. Or you can drain a country economically and essentially hold them ransom....etc. ETC. The U.S. is an expert at covert takeovers.

[JayhawkSD]

10. We did take part of Mexice as our own.

By military force. Ever hear of the Alamo?

[Niceguy1]

21. it was a revolutionary

War....started by the citizens of texas.....

[rogerashton]

31. Texas revolution

Yes -- the settlers in Texas from the US (and a few Tejanos) decided to secede from Mexico when the Mexican government abolished slavery. They seceded in order to keep their slaves. Oh, and don't forget New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and California, and the Gadsden Purchase. And the only reason we didn't annex Canada was that we lost the war of 1812.

[sabrina 1]

14. When we stop invading and killing people in foreign nations and taking control of their

resources, then installing puppet governments, we might be able to point fingers elsewhere.

Btw, the Crimeans voted to annex themselves to Russia. They were driven by the brutal coup in Kiev to do something they had not wanted to do, but after the actions by the 'interim' government, banning their language, eg, now sending in the military to 'crush' any protests, that was inevitable. They did not want to be ruled by the IMF, and who can blame them. See the devastation of once sovereign European nations, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, et al after the takeover of their economies by the IMF.

They didn't initially want to be part of Russia either, but thanks to the Kiev coupers they voted for what they believed was in their best interests.

Btw, what business is any of this of ours? Why are spending money on this, billions that we are told we don't have to extend unemployment, to pay for school lunches? Qui bono? Who is going to benefit from our latest 'investment' of billions of tax dollars in yet another conflict which benefited ONLY Halliburton and all the other 'investors' which they used OUR tax dollars, some of it taken from the SS Fund eg, to enrich themselves?

[TwilightGardener]

3. Because Russia is violating international law.

[defacto7]

5. Isn't that a Tu Quoque logical fallacy

in that a certain position is false or wrong and/or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position? The guilt of the accuser has no relevance to the discussion.

I know what you are saying but the US can accuse Russia whether the US owns its own guilt or not. It doesn't change the facts. If the discussion is one of morality, then OK. If it's about politics and the relevance of several groups in a war dance coming to conclusions that conflict then the facts are of utmost importance, the blame game is of little consequence.

[Lodestar]

6. There is an old adage that says

“The more guilty one is in the perpetration of a dastardly crime,
the more likely they are to accuse innocent parties of the very
same atrocity.”

There is no better example of this on the various geo-political battlefields dotting Planet Earth than the recent color revolution in the Ukraine. A violent revolution which was directly overseen and coordinated by the US-EU espionage agencies. Their highly calculated and preplanned coup d’état orchestrated in Kiev is as transparent as the audiotape of foul language used by Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State, in her conversation with the US ambassador to the Ukraine.

The various collaborators who participated in the execution of this coup d’état include all the usual suspects – US and UK, EU and NATO, CIA and MI6, US Department of State and Council on Foreign Relations, DIA and NSA. Each of these parties is now working overtime to keep the lid on their covert crimes committed against the Ukrainian people. Were they to be exposed in the sunshine of revealed subterfuge and sabotage, the entire world would check these globalist conspirators with finality.

That is the explicit purpose of this exposé.

No other nations on Earth have gotten away with instigating and engineering so many civil wars and revolutions, coup d’états and and government overthrows as the US-UK juggernaut. They in turn goad the EU and NATO into deliberate and premeditated military action that is neither legal nor ethical, lawful nor moral, to finish the ousting process. This acute phase of toppling a democratically elected government is then followed by aggressive overtures from the IMF and/or World Bank, as well as legal threats from the ICC in The Hague.



Read more: http://www.storyleak.com/ukraine-deception-useu-directed-coup-detat-exposes/#ixzz304NDZxAN

[sabrina 1]

15. The propensity of someone to lie, repeatedly and never be held accountable, even when those lies

get a whole lot of people killed, certainly is relevant. In any court of law a witness who is a known liar is not someone a good prosecutor wants to put on the stand considering how easy it is to discredit them. That is how the world now views the US. We condoned the lies and war crimes by refusing to prosecute the criminals, that means that we have no problem as a nation, with liars and war criminals. It's a reality that some refuse to accept. The US will forever be viewed with suspicion until one day the Rule of Law is reestablished and NO ONE is considered above it. Until then even if we are telling the truth, it doesn't matter.

[Duckhunter935]

8. because they are

they broke signed agreements with a sovereign government and invaded and took part of that country for their own. Even in Iraq the US did not keep the land we invaded but allowed the sovereign nation to have it and also have its problems.

[Lodestar]

12. See my posts above. n/t

[sabrina 1]

16. Where did you get that information from? 'They invaded and took part of that country' etc.

Could you provide some credible links to where that info came from? You know, I'm sure not to supply links to any US Corporate Media outlet, which ranks somewhere around 47th on the World's list of credible news reporting. I would like to see something from media that is not controlled by US Corporations, thank you.

[Duckhunter935]

17. and what of the hundreds of international links

would be acceptability to you? Is RT good?

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is a political agreement signed in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994, providing security assurances by its signatories relating to Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The Memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result Ukraine gave up the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996.[2][3]

Crimea is and was a part of the Territory of the country of Ukraine, even Russia agreed to that until they invaded and took it, breaking their signed agreement.

Too bad Ukraine trusted Russia to live by its signed agreement and gave up the nuclear weapons it had and is now mostly defenseless.

[sabrina 1]

18. Good for RT for publishing facts. And too bad Crimeans voted for the annexation

to Russia. Too bad also that the coup government in Kiev drove them to do so by immediately banning their language as an official language, eg. Something they had to try to get out of when wiser heads pointed out the sheer stupidity of such a move. If anyone is to blame for the annexation of Crimea, it is the authoritarian actions of the Kiev 'interim' government.

But what could one expect from those who view toppling elected governments by force, rather than holding elections to let the entire country decide whether they wanted to be under the thumb of the IMF or remain autonomous from either the IMF or Russia.

You haven't provided anything to back up your claim of an invasion of Crimea. Russian troops were always there btw, as part of the agreement you are apparently referring to. So there was no need to 'send' them in, the agreement included their holding a base there. This is what I mean about the lack of credibility of the Western Media, but then we knew that for over a decade of lies about Iraq eg.

[Duckhunter935]

19. I see we will never agree

The Crimean vote also broke the Ukraine constitution as ALL of Ukraine has to vote on that. The President was removed by the elected parliament (even his own party representatives) after fleeing to Russian and was unable to perform his duties. 328 voted to remove, this was 10 votes shy to be constitutional.

By the way has Russia given back all of the Ukrainian state ships and military assets it stole when they invaded and removed the Ukraine military from Ukraine bases and Ukrainian ships? Was blockading the port and preventing the Ukrainian ships to leave lawful? As far as I know they were not a Crimean navy or air force.

[sabrina 1]

22. Any agreement was broken when a coup toppled the government of what was supposedly

a democracy. Once one side breaks an agreement, it's useless to complain when there is a reaction to that.

What should have happened in a Democracy was to hold elections as soon as possible. Coups are for third world dictatorships. Interesting that you forgot what started the chain reaction though. I guess now the US supports coup d'etats because they did not condemn that anti-Democratic method of replacing a government the people are not happy with.

Wait, we ALWAYS supported coups and even backed them, see Latin America eg, more recent attempts include the Bush backed coups in Haiti, in Venezuela and most recently Honduras. We installed such 'dictators' as Saddam Hussein after backing a coup in Iraq, see Iran also.

Hard to take seriously any demands for Democracy from a government with a history of supporting Coups to hurry things up for their own 'interests'.

There are no really 'good guys' behind all this But a lot of innocent people are likely to die, which we know won't bother those in power.

All we can do is keep trying to elect representatives that believe in Democracy, here and elsewhere and who are consistent in their claims to BE supportive of democracy Who will hold our own war criminals accountable and therefore have the moral authority to criticize those who commit crimes against humanity.

But we are a long way from that, until then all we can do is to keep looking for facts and we learned we will not find them in our now Corporate Owned Media, sadly. But that's a start, to not accept without question any sources of information including our own, until there is a consensus from more credible media, now available all over the world.

[Duckhunter935]

20. Yes even RT

had to admit Putin lied and Russia did in fact invade another sovereign country.

[sabrina 1]

23. Actually not even any credible Western media has made that claim re Crimea. But it's always

interesting to see the results of propaganda no matter where it is coming from. It helps people understand the power of the media and how important it is for THIS Democracy to break the stranglehold on our Media by six Corporations which is now infamous for its roll in the propaganda that led this country into a tragic war that killed so many innocent people including our own troops.

Fyi, as someone who reads and watches media from all over the world, the ONLY media referring to Crimea as an 'invasion' is part of the Western, mostly Right Wing, what passes for 'news' but is actually 'opinion', media outlets. Most others have been relatively silent on Crimea due to the fact that there is no credible way to call what happened there an 'invasion'. I guess silence is better than lies.

[Duckhunter935]

24. please post what media

I should be watching and reading besides RT, Russian, Cuba outlets.

[sabrina 1]

25. Well if you're only watching RT and Cuba and our own Corporate Media, that is not my problem.

Eg, there is Indian, Chinese, African, ME, Latin American, European media among other sources, many with excellent journalists reporting on all world events. I can't help you if you confine yourself to RT and Cuban and the corporate media here and then take a 'side' as a result.

[Duckhunter935]

26. I read from many

sources. I also agree with the UN.

The resolution garnered 100 votes in favor, 11 votes against, with 58 abstentions. The two-page text does not identify Russia by name, but describes the referendum as “having no validity” and calls on countries not to recognize the redrawing of Ukraine’s borders.

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/68/L.39

You seem to have failed to answer my question on the return of Ukrainian state navel, army and air force property stolen from the country of Ukraine

You failed to have answered my question if the sinking of a ship to blockade the Ukrainian vessels and then storming them was lawful?

when will the people in the east release the reporters, government officials and others being held hostage?

Is it right to take reporters hostage?

Has that happened in the West?

if it walks like a duck.....

[sabrina 1]

29. The UN didn't stop Bush, did they? Nor have they done anything about the War Crimes

committed by that criminal administration, while they don't hesitate to condemn war crimes of not so powerful, mostly African btw, or otherwise 'brown' nations. The UN is a weak institution controlled by the Western 'votes' mostly.

You ask about holding Reporters hostage? How about killing them? Remember Al Jazeera and the killing of some of their reporters, the detention and even torture of their reporters by the WEST, Bush et al, not to mention the bombing of their headquarters in both Iraq and Afghanistan?

Of course it is not right to attack reporters. Which is why Reporters without Borders have demanded that BOTH sides in this conflict 'allow Reporters to do their jobs without fear of being attacked or harassed or BANNED'.

So yes, the West has done so which is why eg, RT reporters who have been threatened have asked for protection from the International Community.

[Duckhunter935]

33. Yep Bushes fault

He was an idiot and I did not agree with him so I guess Russia can do whatever it wants. Care to answer any of my other questions?

How many RT reporters have are being held hostage in the west?

[sabrina 1]

35. You stated that the West wouldn't do such a thing as 'detain' reporters.

The West has done much worse than just 'detain' reporters. Reporters in this conflict have been threatened and are not waiting to be killed as was the case with Al Jazeera now appealing for help to the International Community. A very smart thing to do considering what the West has done to reporters who do not cooperate with the propaganda being disseminated.

Bush's crimes are the responsibility of this country now. Until one day the rule of law is restored and war criminals finally held accountable The victims, millions of them, continue to try to get justice for the crimes committed against them. Too many victims to sweep under the rug, as was the case in Latin America eg, where after 50 years some of those victims finally got some justice.

There is no statute of limitations on War Crimes, thankfully.

The Iraq invasion saw the killing of more journalists than in any other conflict. Western censorship of the Press is well known, odd you are unaware of these facts.

As for RT reporters, they are less likely NOW to be detained having made the threats to them known to the world. Best way to protect themselves, however, they will need to be very careful as will all journalists who are there to report FACTS.

[rogerashton]

34. Unilateral interventions

Don't forget Granada, Yugoslavia, Kosovo.

[Duckhunter935]

36. its a good thing

we absorbed them into the good old USA instead of leaving them. I am sure Russia will do that also.