Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Leon Brown, Jr.'s avatar

Tremendous analysis, Sol, very comprehensive and very much on point and well written.

Expand full comment
Steven Work's avatar

What a valuable find this SubStack is. If you broke this or others into many shorter articles it would still be difficult to address even only the highlights. Thank you for this Service.

If UN law states;

"In the case of Genocide, the law speaks clearly, any means necessary, including the Use of Force, are legit to stop a Genocide, and every nation have the duty to act to prevent and stop the Genocide from taking place.

Furthermore, the arming and financing of war criminals is also a crime according to among other, also the Genocide Convention, and all of those people and entities which have continued to finance and arm the war criminals and Genocidaires, are thereby also complicit in the crime which they had armed and sponsored."

So, Yemen's response against israel and shipping into israel are not terrorist acts. If true, when USA or others use force against the Yemenis, then isn't that further support of genocide by USA, and unJust use of military aggression?

And - as we know - israeli genocide in Gaza cannot go a day without USA's constant supplies of bombs and money, doesn't that make the USA more complicit the only 'arming and financing' of the genocidal israel?

Why does the UN limit the 'any means necessary' to State action? Actions by militias outside of State control as the Constitution of the USA defines would not be legal? Such as assassination and military violence against the parts of Gov.s that are directing [support of] the genocide, domestic or international be legal?

---

God Bless., Steve

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts