No President has the right to use unilateral executive authority to permit a U.S. missile strike against another nation. It invites a retaliatory attack. It is an impeachable offense.

  • davel@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 days ago

    agree to might makes right

    I see, we’re playing word games.

    I will never “agree”—in the sense of “accept as a moral truth”—that “might makes right;” I will only acknowledge that it in fact can and often does make “right.” But not “right” as in “moral” or “reasonable” or “desirable,” but “right” as in “what actually ends up happening.”

    • _pi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Sure but you’re dodging the question now.

      The point is if we want to talk about what’s legal on the international stage. Russia’s views have consequences. There’s nothing that about US’s support of Ukraine that is illegal. So Russia is saying that the US is escalating and is a direct party in the war, which I can see an argument for. Which means that because North Korea has joined the war on the side of Russia, America has a legal reason to bomb Pyongyang in the same way it bombed Bryansk (in Russia’s view).

      See Russia is advocating for Russia. It will throw North Korea under the bus in this scenario, the question is, is that fair to North Korea?