UK should stop arming Israel after ICJ advisory ruling, top lawyer says
Exclusive: Philippe Sands KC says non-binding opinion will nevertheless be seen as ‘authoritative statement of law’
What did Mr. Sands say about selling arms to Israel before the court ruling? If it was already that such sales should stop then the court ruling hsa made no difference, has it?
There’s really no need for the guardian to tage this with an “Exclusive” because nobody else was likely to publish the inconsequential burblings of a sanctimonious progressive (tautology?) lawyer.
Consistantly, we should also be demanding that the UK stop arming Ukraine.
‘Take all the weapons from the moslems and there would be peace in the middle east. Take all the weapons from the Jews and there would be no Jews in the middle east’.
The man is a Nazi apologist, who can’t even spell Philip properly (as a result of being half French – which means that he is a cunt anyway). He talks through his arse on a number of subjects, but like a stopped clock that is right twice a day, occasionally, his views are sensible. Not on the matter of Yids, however.
– Consistantly, we should also be demanding that the UK stop arming Ukraine.
Ceasing arming Ukraine would not be consistent with this. It is Russia, not Ukraine, that has been on the wrong end of ICJ and ICC rulings.
Not that I think legal twattery is helpful in either case. Nations should write the Ts and Is; the begowned tossers can cross and dot them afterwards to suit the winners.
He’s Matrix Chambers, so human rights (Mickey Mouse) “law” – about as far away in intellectual heft and rigour from actual law as Murphy’s thoughts on economics are from actual economics. File his thoughts under fiction, along with those of Sir Kneel, Mrs Blair and Mrs Clooney.
A particularly irksome figure, and alongside Jolyon Maugham and Charlotte Proudperson, a breathing illustration of why Reform UK will have to establish parallel courts alongside the existing infrastructure.
How does the ICJ plan to enforce its rulings?
Ukraine is fighting an existential battle for survival against an unprovoked attack by a neighbough that wants to eliminate them.
Israel is fighting an existential battle for survival against an unprovoked attack by a neighbough that wants to eliminate them.
If you demand Israel de-arms and allows themselves to be slaughtered, you must demand that Ukraine de-arms and allows themselves to be slaughtered.
Ukraine is fighting an existential battle for survival against an unprovoked attack by a neighbough that wants to eliminate them.
Are they, eh? Very slowly trying to eliminate them, I suppose.
How surprised will you be when Ukraine agrees a peace treaty with Russia?
– How does the ICJ plan to enforce its rulings?
It can sit back and let the Obama|Biden|Harris installation do the grunt work, justified by its legal bilge.
I’m fairly worried about Israel in the medium term now, instead of long term previously.
PJF – I’m fairly worried about Israel in the medium term now
Yarp, it looks like they’re being set up for destruction in much the same way white South Africa was.
How surprised will you be when Ukraine agrees a peace treaty with Russia?
A very idea Steve. Give it about a year to settle down then crater the entirety of Western Russia all the way back to Moscow. Show ’em how it’s done. That’s the way you play war games. To win.
The thing is, you can’t – as you could with any western enemy – threaten to “bomb Hamas back to the stone age” as that would represent many centuries of development.
BiS – A very idea Steve. Give it about a year to settle down then crater the entirety of Western Russia all the way back to Moscow
With what? It’s doubtful England, France and Germany could muster 300 working tanks between them, and I don’t think the UK/Euro populace is going to cooperate with any schemes to conscript them. Dunno if President Trump wants to send a couple of divisions to Europe, or if the US Army can still generate that kind of expeditionary land power. BritGov is responding to the significant threat Russia represents by making the British Army even smaller, so it’s harder to hit. (Checkmate, Putler)
That leaves the nuclear option, and we have far fewer of those than we did. It was very silly to retire the WE.177 without a replacement, imo. Very, very silly to retreat from the ability to deliver a tactical level atomic “you shall not pass!”. The British government has been trying to play World Power on the cheap for so long, they’ve forgotten how dangerous that is when your bluff is called.
Anyway, in Bizarro Cold War, what is it we – the poorer and weaker side – is meant to defend? Infinite Third World immigration (and the migrants being given more rights than you), mandatory eco poverty, binders for schoolgirls, managed democracies where your votes are solemnly counted and laughed at, ritualistic shaming of whites on the Beeb, or King Charles’ and Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset?
Nyet.
If your description of our defences is correct, Steve, having the Russian army bleed out in Ukraine has been a genius move. I think we should keep it up.
PJF
The problem is with the 1.5 million or so Hamas Guerillas in the UK already in place and primed to commit attacks. Perhaps they may be a bigger national security threat than Russia? But of course let’s concentrate on Putin while we have 40 pro Hamas MPs in Parliament.
PJF – But the Russian army is not bleeding out in Ukraine, it’s getting significantly bigger as Russian mobilisation manifests itself in more men and weapons, as you would know if you read the recent interview with General Syrskyi.
So as usual, you’ve been conned into winning nothing.
Would that be the General Syrskyi who’s main job it is to persuade the yanks to send much more hardware and ammo? Just askin’…
Meanwhile, the Russian tank boneyards are getting seriously depleted of T-64s.
So as usual, you’ve been conned into winning nothing.
What a strange person you are, Steve.