Who loves international law?
Not us, or at least not very much, and less so than our American friends:
Having studied international law, albeit a long time ago, I have limited patience with some of those who bang on about what is or is not a breach of it, as even the most cursory examination of it shows that it is at best protean, and at worst a chimaera. Note that Pakistan has the largest majority reckoning that the national interest comes first, while the Chinese are the keenest on observing it. Supposedly.
Having studied international law, albeit a long time ago, I have limited patience with some of those who bang on about what is or is not a breach of it, as even the most cursory examination of it shows that it is at best protean, and at worst a chimaera. Note that Pakistan has the largest majority reckoning that the national interest comes first, while the Chinese are the keenest on observing it. Supposedly.
Labels: Cant, great lawsuits of our time
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 04, 2009 at 12:42 pm.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
Why (rhetorically) are Hong Kong and Macau excluded - presumably on grounds of size and number of weapons per capita - but the "Palestinian Territories" (whatever that may mean) are included? Maybe the relative level of armaments is factor in that, but if so then why does Formosa have a semi-detatched status too? Lots of missiles there.
Anyway, here in Gib the 'view' would be "Int'l law is buffet to be selectively picked at by your larger neighbour to beat you over the head with when it suits them"
"at best protean, and at worst a chimaera"
Now that's reet posh, Mr C.
ASE - tis a rum business all together.
JM - Fair. I got a bit carried away.
» Post a Comment