Search results

What part of ”Noone has the right to torture” do You not understand. Not to my knowledge. Yes, and that is because there are good reasons. During the Soviet Afghan War, the US provided funding and arms, and Pakistan distributed the funding, the arms and did the training. The deal made between...

You always have a legal right to attack in a War of Self-Defense Iraq violated multiple clauses in the ceasefire agreement in a war started hy Iraq, All permanent members have that right and all other countries have accepted this. Not really, except governments that attack the US. All...

The US did not train or fund OBL. . US provided funds and weapons and all training was done by Pakistan which selected who to train. They did not care much for Arabs. The Taliban was basically a non-entity when the US left. Only grew in power years later when Pakistan funded trained and armed...

Why would the United States need to provide evidence in 2001, when Al-Qaeda abandoned its neutrality in 1998? Al-Qaeda declared war on the United States before that. Then they attacked embassies in Africa and USS Cole. And Afghanistan refused to intern Al-Qaeda in 1998. The US were legally...

What started this - Your whataboutism. I quickly started threads to discuss this after my first reply, and You decided to answer in this thread.

The article explains that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia tried to make Mullah Omar realize he obligations to the international society, but he wanted war with the US. The US gave him a last chance to avoid war, and he responded with arrogance. The US was not obliged to give him evidence of 9/11...

@Foinikas Here is the thread You should have replied to, but which you probably did not bother to read.

As I suspected, you fail. Then You continue arguing. You also do not understand legal matters. If someone provides five reasons to goto war and only one is valid, that is enough for the war to be legal. That four are invalid is of no importance. I started a thread on this and the Afghan War...

Once You debunked all the reasons for terminating … And You know you will fail, so You don’t even try.

Once You debunked all the reasons given for terminating the ceasefire with Iraq, you can argue that the invasion 2003 was illegal, otherwise not. https://defence.pk/threads/authorization-for-use-of-military-force-against-iraq-resolution-of-2002.775821/ If You simply think it was a bad idea...

The title of the thread clearly indicates it is about Afghanistan. Articles that are important to explaining the Afghan War even if they mention other countries are OK. Trying to deviate the thread into discussing Libya, Sudan or whatever is not. I will ignore any further comments from you...

International Law says that you may not invade neutral countries. International Law does not say anything about being a non-belligerent country. Legally there is no difference between being a belligerent country and a non-belligerent country. It is not forbidden to attack a belligerent country...

You can attack a country which has enemy bases or otherwise contribute to your enemies war effort. You have claimed this before, and never produced any sources supporting your view. Al-Qaeda had admitted the attacks on the Embassy and USS Cole, no further motivation is legally needed after...

There is a big difference between Russias Wars of Aggression to repress the population/annexing territory and interventions based on UNSC resolutions (Libya, Syria, Iraq), Wars of Self-Defense (Afghanistan) and terminating a ceasefire after multiple violations (Iraq).

Only an idiot believes that September 1998 comes after September 2001, After this meeting, Afghanistan was no longer neutral and thus it was legal to attack Afghanistan in 1998 as they supported Al-Qaeda which was at war with the US. The US gave Afghanistan a final warning in 2001 out if...

This is about rights and not capabilities. You claim that Tibet belongs to China because it belonged to the Mongols. Logically, China then belongs to Mongolia. The Mongol Empire was a significant part of history. Chinas internal wars were Not. I guess you live by the ”might are right” and...

Russia is not entitled to any influence over any sovereign country, which they have agreed on in 1997. The United States accepted Soviet bases on Cuba. It did not accept Soviet missiles on Cuba. Should Poland attack Kaliningrad, because quite obviously it is a threat to Poland? Should they...

You mean that China should start an illegal War of Aggression? That did not work out for Russia.