But the problem is – as it has always been with Mr. al-Assad’s atrocities – that atrocities are not themselves justification for one state to use force against another. This is true whether atrocities are committed with small arms or banned weapons of mass destruction.
Only a fool still disavows global warming when he is up to his neck in water.
America’s consistent trick is to raise up the banner of “international law” when it is advantageous. But when it isn’t, the U.S. treads international law underfoot and continues on its way with complete disregard for it.
<i>In a column for Argumenti i Facti, political analyst Sergei Markov suggests that because the two countries view one another as rivals for power, relations between the U.S. and China will continue to worsen.</i>
On Wednesday, China issued a harsh statement regarding Washington’s position on the South China Sea [Read more]
Ultimately, if the present course is maintained, it risks the United States — especially under a President Trump — taking unilateral action that would undermine and render obsolete the entirety of international relations.
The U.S.'s methods are overly excessive and extremely dangerous; who would want to follow them in taking these risks?
The militarization of the South Sea is a verbal trap. The Chinese government has always advocated making the area into a sea of cooperation and peace.
Despite the anti-U.S. hysteria in the Russian media, the Russian government continues to keep its currency reserves in U.S. dollars, U.S. assets and U.S. securities.
It is a dangerous precedent if responses to global threats must set aside legal principle for subjective morality.