Comments by "" (@CYMotorsport) on "AJ+" channel.

A bit of cognitive dissonance left you avoided settling: this is a move beyond what we’ve seen. Using prior response as a benchmark doesn’t work as consequences were less severe. We’re not talking just annexation here. Different as well from US & Iraq - a war that was not illegal - atleast not explicitly. Secretary General Annan spoke for the UN - but surely you see of all people to assert that, it would be the UN. The fact is Saddam was in violation of roughly 2 dozen resolutions re: disarming. They passed resolution 1441 for him to which was not met. The administration should have taken a more refined approach with better planning, I agree. But there’s a case for legality. This is not the case for The current conflict. I do think your underlying logic holds though but you didn’t mention the alleviating factor of China which defuses much of the sanctions , to a degree. What I 100% agree with is the paper tiger that is the UN. This will come down to the choice the Biden administration makes knowing China is watching with bated breath as they eye Taiwan.
12