On 2009-10-01 11:34:10 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the
legitimacy of the Taliban government given the state of armed
resistance to it. The invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal but
the invasion of Afghanistan is legally ambiguous.

The invasion of Iraq was not, "unquestionably illegal". I question the
illegality of it. Saddam Hussein killed over two million Iraqi's during
his 30 year reign as Iraq's president. To me, this justifies
eliminating him. Certainly, it at least raises the "question" of
legality/illegality. Maybe he only killed one million. Maybe he killed
four million. At what point would you consider it mandatory that the
other heads of state in this world become justified in killing him?
Were we justified in killing Adolf Hitler? Should we have killed Josef
Stalin? Should we just turn out backs on anything, and not ever kill
anybody, no matter what they do? And, in any case, how can you dismiss
the whole argument with a half dozen words?

IIRC we did not kill Hitler (unless you know something we haven't been told.)
Tojo, we dropped through a floor with a safety rope around his neck,
but Hirohito got a pass, you might say Tojo took the fall for him.

....and Stalin was on our side. We accepted him as an ally with full
knowledge of his butchery.

--
Regards,

Savageduck