Re:US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan
by gozur88 on Sunday April 16, 2017 @06:42PM
(#14127971)
>Starting the war for those aims is a war of aggression...
No it isn't. That's not at all true.
Re:US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan
by flukus on Monday April 17, 2017 @08:56PM
(#14135730)
So you wouldn't classify Napoleons invasion and the creation of Westphalia as a war of aggression?
How about Ceasars invasion of Gaul? He had a casus belli.
Re:US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan
by boomboomsubban on Sunday April 16, 2017 @11:19PM
(#14129030)
Yeah, it is. There's millennia of precedent here and I'm not going any further to argue against "nuh-uh."
Re:US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan
by gozur88 on Monday April 17, 2017 @07:13PM
(#14135241)
Precedent? This isn't a court case. I begin to see the problem here: You're misapplying a historical template. This isn't 19th Century British Empire - the US had an iron-clad casus belli in Afghanistan, and to ignore that is to completely mischaracterize the situation.
Re:US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan
by boomboomsubban on Monday April 17, 2017 @08:51PM
(#14135698)
"This isn't a court case, they had an iron-clad case for war." The only point of a cassus belli is to justify your war of aggression, if someone declares war on you the case for it is clear.
And no, the cassus belli was not iron-clad. There are only three legal ones under current law. Defense, defense of an ally, and a UN approval. First two don't work, Afghanistan hadn't declared any wars, and the third never happened.
Really confused what you're going on about, you keep saying I'm wrong but don't try to say why.