Now we are beginning to understand why the international rule of law is so important.

Cossy

MayBee70

We won’t need a world war to destroy the world. Once Trump starts drilling for oil in places like Greenland ( and encouraging more countries to ignore global warming) it won’t take many oil spills to damage the arctic regions. What is the point of someone devoting their lives to make themselves and their family rich beyond belief only to destroy the very world they live in?

I really don’t think the good people of both Greenland and Denmark will roll over and allow this to happen and Carney in Canada has already made his distain for Trump very very clear!

What we need are more strong, solid world leaders to tell Trump it’s over and for his own govt to take a very hard long look at themselves and him!

Not going to happen.

Galaxy

I think the idea of international law is complete fiction. It is like some epic game of lets pretend. Who do people think will enforce international law and when will they start.

The UN has policed many situations where the international rule of law was being broken notably during the later half of the last century into this century, but it has certainly failed to act so decisively during recent times, largely I think because of the failure of the strongest countries to support it.

So it isn’t a fiction, it isn’t perfect, but it certainly worked when the countries of the world recognised its value snd necessity for a smooth running of world order.

The UN is toothless and has been for ages, no point to it now at all.
The bigger stronger countries will always do what’s best for themselves in the world.
Europe has to keep the US onside as we don’t have any friends elsewhere!

Oreo

The UN is toothless and has been for ages, no point to it now at all.
The bigger stronger countries will always do what’s best for themselves in the world.
Europe has to keep the US onside as we don’t have any friends elsewhere!

Don’t you mean the UK?

No I don’t mean the UK.

UK has already been invaded
Invaders everywhere in hotels HMOs

nanna8

Every country has different beliefs and standards and I think those very few precepts which all agree on should be upheld. Maybe the 10 commandments. That was probably why they started in the first place.

I dont agree. While countries differ in beliefs and traditions, there are many shared moral standards across cultures. These similarities don’t come from a single source like the Ten Commandments, but from common human needs for cooperation, safety, and social stability.

I have little faith in the UN: only a minority of members are democracies. Nor do I have much faith in international law when there is no effective and consistent enforcement mechanism.

Trump doesn't respect international law. He says the USA is "entitled" to take over countries to protect itself. He is accustomed to getting his own way, like a spoiled toddler, so the international community will have to find a way to stand up to him.

What is the alternative to some form of international rule of law?

In 1981 Margaret Thatcher whilst throughout her life, a strong supporter of Israel, criticised Israel over its actions in the Golan Heights and I have posted her quote which I think gets to the absolute basic of the principle which relates to the situation we find ourselves in today

The Principle: She stated, "If we are not going to live by a system of international law, we are going to live by international anarchy. Then no people anywhere in the world are safe".
Rejection of Selectivity: She emphasized that "You cannot be selective in your defence of law – you cannot say: 'I like that law, I will uphold that one, I will not uphold the other'".

The so called Intenational Rule of Law is broken by countriesvvery week. It is just a bit of a joke really and not worth the paper it is written.onm

As for the United Nations.Long past its sell by date..With no real power.
In short just a Boys Club.

Cossy

Oreo

The UN is toothless and has been for ages, no point to it now at all.
The bigger stronger countries will always do what’s best for themselves in the world.
Europe has to keep the US onside as we don’t have any friends elsewhere!

Don’t you mean the UK?

The UN didn’t exactly cover themselves in glory in the Balkan war.

www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html

Putin warned NATO but he was ignored and so acted on it.

DaisyAnneReturns

nanna8

Every country has different beliefs and standards and I think those very few precepts which all agree on should be upheld. Maybe the 10 commandments. That was probably why they started in the first place.

I dont agree. While countries differ in beliefs and traditions, there are many shared moral standards across cultures. These similarities don’t come from a single source like the Ten Commandments, but from common human needs for cooperation, safety, and social stability.

Having lived in France for 20 years I am very much aware of how belief in Liberty, Equality, Fraternity underpins French society and French life.
I read some posts on Gransnet these days and get the impression some people have turned into Anarchists. 😮

These similarities don’t come from a single source like the Ten Commandments, but from common human needs for cooperation, safety, and social stability.

Which is clearly expressed in the Ten Commandments.
If we were all able to live by them live would be far easier.
But many people today appear to reject any concept of a higher moral authority.

I doubt many have read or are even aware of what the 10 commandments are, sadly . Thanks easybee, to me it is very clear .

Interestingly, the Epiphany story that many Christians are marking at the moment touches on something relevant here.

The Wise Men were foreigners, crossing borders, guided by a shared understanding of signs and authority rather than force. When they encountered Herod’s abuse of power, they chose not to cooperate with it and returned home “by another way”. Even in that ancient story, we see the tension between legitimate authority, tyranny, and the moral obligation not to assist injustice; which is very much what the international rule of law is meant to address.

The wise men or kings were likely to have been wealthy merchants or similar but they were wise indeed to avoid possible death, injury or imprisonment by going home another way.

I agree, their decision was pragmatic. But that pragmatism arises when power isn’t constrained by law. In a system governed by predictable rules, you don’t have to calculate whether obeying an authority might get you killed or imprisoned. The fact that they had to go home another way illustrates the cost of rule by fear rather than rule by law. This is what international law tries to prevent.

It wants to prevent but it can’t when push comes to shove.

Oreo
I may be wrong here but I thought the idea that they were merchants was no longer thought accurate.
I think it's now thought they would have travelled with merchants for both supplies and to increase protection.

The Magi were people from a very specific, elite hereditary priestly caste from ancient Persia/Media ... a sort of (royal) scientist-monk.

Whilst I think it makes a better story, I think the timings regarding Herod (who was undoubtedly a murderous abd vile person) are wrong DaisyAnneReturns.
I'd have to look the dates up though!

It all depend on which holds sway in a particular situation.
Is it 'might is right'?
Or, the 'pen is mightier than the sword'?

NotSpaghetti

Oreo
I may be wrong here but I thought the idea that they were merchants was no longer thought accurate.
I think it's now thought they would have travelled with merchants for both supplies and to increase protection.

The Magi were people from a very specific, elite hereditary priestly caste from ancient Persia/Media ... a sort of (royal) scientist-monk.

Whilst I think it makes a better story, I think the timings regarding Herod (who was undoubtedly a murderous abd vile person) are wrong DaisyAnneReturns.
I'd have to look the dates up though!

I think the origins are too far in the misty past NotSpaghetti to be really sure of who they were.

Maremia

It all depend on which holds sway in a particular situation.
Is it 'might is right'?
Or, the 'pen is mightier than the sword'?

The pen is never mightier than the sword tho is it?