Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers. It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself. So in other words, you're saying that an o...

That's a lost case by Russia it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it...

Both of these lines were legally flawed, Expert cited by djmixxx legally flawed = illegal ? From what times? it's called interpretation of the law. - In the case of Iraq, the United States applied a not very clear legal strategy - on the one hand, they used the right to self-defense, on the other h...

Court's reasoning The court first determined that it had jurisdiction to order provisional relief "pursuant to Article IX of the Genocide Convention," which empowers the ICJ to resolve disputes over the interpretation, application, or fulfillment of the Convention. The court explained tha...

it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it on TV. Old already. So Russi...

Gah... you're all's quotes are broken (you're missing an end quote starting with one of mmmPi's posts). It's driving me nuts at the moment. :lol: I corrected 1 that was causing a misattribution, there is one still wrong but it has been quoted later so i won't change it, it's just one time the whole...

do i have to post them all here? I posted one. he very clearly explained how you can twist the law and do illegal things. You post 0, the only person you post on the article contradict your statement that Russia's invasion was somewhat in a legal loophole He say that what has been done is illegal, ...

Comparisons to Western interventions in other countries Russia has also tried to justify its invasion of Ukraine by comparing its actions to interventions by the United States and its allies during the Kosovo War, the Iraq War, the Libyan Crisis, and the Syrian civil war. These comparisons have bee...

Here you lied : The trick is that legally Russia did everything right . But morally, no. Many experts write about this trick like this: Russia used this provision of international law, but it cannot be used like that. This is called the duality of the interpretation of the law. The only ever trial ...

Here you lied : The trick is that legally Russia did everything right . But morally, no. Many experts write about this trick like this: Russia used this provision of international law, but it cannot be used like that. This is called the duality of the interpretation of the law. The only ever trial ...

" When you heard that Putin invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter as a justification for the invasion, were you surprised? — No, this is a very typical move. This could be expected after the recognition of the independence of the republics in the east of Ukraine. Many said that this step should...

Or maybe it's the translation that is not correct ? or difficulty in understanding my text. Where I am write that expert told what it is legal? Here you lied : The trick is that legally Russia did everything right. But morally, no. Many experts write about this trick like this: Russia used this pro...

There are still no names of expert of internationnal law that would consider the invasion something "legal", i would be interested to know who where those mentionned earlier in the discussion. https://meduza.io/feature/2022/02/24/putin-govorit-chto-ustav-oon-daet-emu-pravo-na-samooboronu-...

even if Ukraine had been planning an attack against Donetsk or Luhansk, Russia could not invoke Article 51's collective self-defense provision because these regions are not recognized as separate states under international law.[2][4][6] Allen Weiner of Stanford Law School made a similar argument, l...

Early djmixxx : Many experts write about this trick like this: After being asked several times who, late djmixxx : "In his opinion, the question of the court's jurisdiction is indeed ambiguous, since official Russian documents do not really mention the genocide. Russia's statements about the ge...

There are still no names of expert of internationnal law that would consider the invasion something "legal", i would be interested to know who where those mentionned earlier in the discussion.

Of all the text, only this matters. Yeah you are very qualified to pick which sentence you like and which one you prefer not to read because it contradict your saying : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Ongoing_legal_proceedings Ongoing legal proceedings...

Why don't you just tell me the names of the experts you quote instead of giving me your own personnal interpretation copy pasted from i don't know where which has 0 credibility after you showed your ignorance multiple times on this particular topic ? Or give me the source of the earlier post you ma...

The trick is that legally Russia did everything right. But morally, no. Many experts write about this trick like this: Russia used this provision of international law, but it cannot be used like that. This is called the duality of the interpretation of the law. "The international practice of r...

You really are bad at chronology, your article which you probably didn't even read is from 2022, this is because there is a treaty called Budapest memorandum signed in 1994 during which Ukraine agreed to give back its nuclear weapon for a promise of security guarantee from USA UK and RUSSIA. And wh...