Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can read the abstract, you can log in (or request access) if you want but it is comforting to know that the link did work. And as to your contention that closing the straits was not an attack. well, there is a lot in international law which would disagree with your assessment.Your link says you must log on through a library to 'continue reading'.
Closing the Strait, was not an attack on Israel
That means that the blockade of Gaza is an act of war.You can read the abstract, you can log in (or request access) if you want but it is comforting to know that the link did work. And as to your contention that closing the straits was not an attack. well, there is a lot in international law which would disagree with your assessment.
Please quote the specific IHL you are referring to.You can read the abstract, you can log in (or request access) if you want but it is comforting to know that the link did work. And as to your contention that closing the straits was not an attack. well, there is a lot in international law which would disagree with your assessment.
Your link doesn't work.
I have done a lot of reading on this topic and nothing changes the fact that Israeli tanks rolled into Egypt to start the war.
It doesn't matter. All that matters is, it was not Israel's.
actually, no it doesn't. You should read the law.That means that the blockade of Gaza is an act of war.
you could read Bergman's book (I provided a link) or just this quick summaryPlease quote the specific IHL you are referring to.
Article 51 allows only 2 legal ways to attack another country with military force:you could read Bergman's book (I provided a link) or just this quick summary
"At the time, members of the international community pledged that Israel would never again be denied use of the Straits of Tiran. The French representative to the UN, for example, announced that an attempt to interfere with free shipping in the Straits would be against international law, and American President Dwight Eisenhower went so far as publicly to recognize that reimposing a blockade in the Straits of Tiran would be seen as an aggressive act which would oblige Israel to protect its maritime rights in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter"
Article 51 allows only 2 legal ways to attack another country with military force:
Israel was not attacked with a significant force (like what happened at Pearl Harbor), nor did they seek UNSC authorization. The closing of the Staits is considered a 'frontier incident' and does not qualify as an attack under Article 51.
- You, yourself are attacked
- You receive UNSC authorization
Gee, so you are right and DDE was wrong? How amazing that I'm here with someone who knows more than the president of the US about international law. If you really want to understand what Article 51 includes, you need to do some reading.Article 51 allows only 2 legal ways to attack another country with military force:
Israel was not attacked with a significant force (like what happened at Pearl Harbor), nor did they seek UNSC authorization. The closing of the Staits is considered a 'frontier incident' and does not qualify as an attack under Article 51.
- You, yourself are attacked
- You receive UNSC authorization
Why should he know what he does not care about?someone who knows more than the president of the US about international law.
DDE didn't care about international law?Why should he know what he does not care about?
Read the News.DDE didn't care about international law?
Is there news about DDE? He died in 1969 and there is still news about him?Read the News.
