Talk for Article "Syria strike labelled ‘crime’ or ‘precise and effective’"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    Not only Russia/Syria/Iran say that is illegal, such voices are in the UK as well:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/16/labour-releases-advice-casting-doubt-on-legitimacy-of-syria-strikes
    And if we were to analyze the arguments provided by the UK government, there is no alternative conclusion except for the action being illegal (it can be proven by international law and logic, not opinions).
    Nice analysis here:
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/04/the-british-governments-legal-justification-for-bombing-is-entirely-false-and-without-merit/
    So, instead of saying ‘there are different thoughts’, we could have made a clearer message that UK’s justification does not meet the norms of international law, even though that’s an inconvenient truth these days.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      as well as in Germany, I refere to the legal analysis of the Research Services of the German Parliament which I have just added to the story (still pending):
      https://www.bundestag.de/blob/551344/f8055ab0bba0ced333ebcd8478e74e4e/wd-2-048-18-pdf-data.pdf

      1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        Hi Ingrid, I’ve approved everything so the story should have all your fixes now.

        1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

          thank you, Angela.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us