i agree...also im still not sure the UN has approved this bombing. Didnt the US officially leave Iraq? Does the US just have a free pass to do what it wants over Iraq now?
i saw mention of this road - any idea in which direction? I take it they're abandoning Iraq for the forseeable...
Nothing beyond a series of confirmed unusual troop/security services deployments following first rumours of a coup for a few days then secondly the president criticising Maliki and vice versa and thirdly Maliki doing his best to block any and everything that would break the parliamentary blockage. He's running out of political friends. Everyone knows when he loses the protection of his position then he's either dead or in jail for the rest of his life - he knows it to too. All this fuels the rumours.
Note also their Twitter account choosing this moment to say they have total faith in the president as guarantor of constitution.
It's not tedious - it's just nothing then to do with them.
What chance them doing a bit decorating in Syria and other houses where IS is active?
i don't want to derail this thread with the issue, but i would expect international law doesnt just let you invite other countries armies in to bomb others within your borders....the UN is imperfect but I'd rather see an international response to this situation than one solely led by the US. who knows, maybe they do have the UNs rubber stamp, though I havent seen it mentioned anywhere. I would expect the UN to be orchestrating the process of stabilisation across the middle east, not US planners..though i appreciate in reality the UN is far from the executive power it might be in these kinds of situations.
It doesn't matter what you would expect or would like to see though - it's just nothing to do with the UN. That's all there is to it. Once the action was requested by the lawful Iraqi govt that's it. The more confusing legal aspect is whether Obama has the legal power to authorise the strikes as regards the US constitution.
Does that contravene international law? If Westminster requests France's airforce to bomb Scotland wouldn't international law require some kind of approval from the UN? I was under the impression it was the UN's security council alone thats in a position to authorise military action
this is "an international response", just not the sort of international response you think appropriate.
the un is not some clearing house for bombing requests
Where did you get that idea from? The UN can authorise military action by the relevant bodies against a state but it has sweet FA to do with with states actions within another state such as this.
It was a presumption.
i thought that after the extensive coverage of the un in 2002/03 as well as more recent forays around e.g. libya this sort of ignorance would have been dispelled.
President says he's appointed new PM - Maliki says news to me.
