See other Editorial Articles
Title: Blair no credibility in citing international law, says UK daily
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-239/0703311056143539.htm
Published: Apr 1, 2007
Author: staff
Post Date: 2007-04-01 12:45:18 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 135
Comments: 7
Blair no credibility in citing international law, says UK daily London, March 31, IRNA UK Daily-Sailor Arrests A leading British daily Saturday suggested that one of the reasons the UK government failed to win the support of the UN Security Council in its diplomatic dispute over Iran's arrest of UK sailors was because Prime Minister Tony Blair has no credibility. "Because of the catastrophe in Iraq, the UK has no real diplomatic leverage in the region," the Independent said in its editorial on the week-long crisis. "Blair calls the Iranian action illegal in international law and cites the United Nations mandate for the presence of British forces in Iraq. But the US and Britain invaded Iraq ignoring the will of the UN," it said. The newspaper, which has been an outspoken critic of the Iraq war, also reminded its readers that former UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, also described the US-led invasion as "illegal." "Blair has little moral authority when he cites international law now. It is notable that the UN statement stopped short of deploring the Iranian action, as requested by Britain," it said. The brief statement, issued after hours of protracted debate in New York on Thursday, also refused to support Britain's claim that the arrest of 15 UK sailors was in Iraqi waters. The Independent further questioned whether British naval operations in the Persian Gulf were completely lawful, saying the statement "makes no mention of Security Council resolution 1723 that authorizes the coalition presence in Iraq." "The wounds opened by the foolish invasion of Iraq by the US and the UK have not healed," it said. The editorial suggested that a way out of Britain's "mess" may well come with the help of the European Union, saying that "Brussels is more respected in Tehran than Britain, the US or the UN."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tom007 (#0)
We all know international law only has force when it is advantageous for the United States and its poodle- Britain. When such laws get in the way of the interests of the US or Britain then they are "librul" plots to usurp their soverneignty. For example . . . The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty is "leftist" surrender monkeyism when the United States ignores it. Whereas if Iran ignores it- despite the fact that the United States has been using it as tissue paper for the past 6 years- it is a casa belli for war. See how that works? International law, treaties, ancient established protocals of diplomacy- are for the mud people nations to follow and whose standards we judge their actions by. However- these same laws, treaties, and customs of diplomacy in no way bind the "SUPER POWERS" to any sort of conduct.
I thought I was the only one that noticed that. You've probably also noticed that the U.N. is an evil two bit organization with no credibility (which I agree with) up until the point that they agree with the United States, at which point they are a respected, esteemed body whose wisdom cannot be denied.
The brief statement, issued after hours of protracted debate in New York on Thursday, also refused to support Britain's claim that the arrest of 15 UK sailors was in Iraqi waters. It's clear that Tony must ply his considerable girly wiles on George and convince him to trade the kidnapped Iranian diplomats and Iranian General for the UK sailors.
I believe that war, not a trade, is the plan.
That is the neocons' "hope" but Blair has zero credibility in the UK - even less than King George has America - Blair is on the way out so legacy is close up for him, a matter of a month or 2. Blair needs to leave office on a positive note and getting Britain into a 3rd war with Goofy is not what Blair wants. Blair rec'd limited support from the UN and zero support from the EU. He wants to negotiate and look like a diplomatic hero to the public. The problem Blair is facing now is how to get George to give up the Iranians. War for Blair is not an option at this stage of his political career.
I hope that the Brits have the good sense to opt-out of the coming conflict.
Exactly right Burke - and a thousand other examples can be thought of as well, not to even mention Israel situation which seem to be a the kernal of most of the United States foreign relation nightmares.
#2. To: Burkeman1 (#1)
We all know international law only has force when it is advantageous for the United States and its poodle- Britain. When such laws get in the way of the interests of the US or Britain then they are "librul" plots to usurp their soverneignty.
#3. To: tom007 (#0)
It is notable that the UN statement stopped short of deploring the Iranian action, as requested by Britain," it said.
#4. To: scrapper2 (#3)
It's clear that Tony must ply his considerable girly wiles on George and convince him to trade the kidnapped Iranian diplomats and Iranian General for the UK sailors.
#5. To: lodwick (#4)
I believe that war, not a trade, is the plan.
#6. To: scrapper2 (#5)
War for Blair is not an option at this stage of his political career.
#7. To: Burkeman1 (#1)
he Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty is "leftist" surrender monkeyism when the United States ignores it. Whereas if Iran ignores it- despite the fact that the United States has been using it as tissue paper for the past 6 years- it is a casa belli for war.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest