Nation vs International Laws

[xlsdraw]

No it did not justify invading another country and kidnapping that leader.

The international laws are their to put up guard rails. From what you are trying defend you must think that it is permissible to ignore any law that does not suit a nation.

As I said before he has made the US no better that any other rogue nation.

I do not find the Humanistic institution of International Law in the scriptures, unless you're referring to the Antichrist Kingdom.

Scripturally, God holds Nations accountable to their own behavior towards God and His scriptures. Sowing and Reaping.

You might want to start with that beam that is in your Canadian eye.

 

[JonC]

No it did not justify invading another country and kidnapping that leader.

The international laws are their to put up guard rails. From what you are trying defend you must think that it is permissible to ignore any law that does not suit a nation.

As I said before he has made the US no better that any other rogue nation.

That is what I mean by morals are held differently by different people.

I believe the US (Canada) had the moral responsibility to liberate the Venezuelan people from Maduro. I believe we had the same responsibility with Cuba decades ago.

The UN declared that Maduro was guilty of crimes against humanity, comdemned his murdering of thousands of Venezuelans.

But did nothing.

If it was just for his crimes against Venezuela I don't think the US would have acted.

His terroristic actions against the US also provided a reason the US should have acted. But I do not think that was the reason.

I believe a significant reason was the power influence Russia and China would have over US and Canada should Maduro retain his hold.

But the US (and Canada) had a moral responsibility to remove Maduro. The UN had the responsibility but could not because of China and Russia.

 

[Silverhair]

I do not find the Humanistic institution of International Law in the scriptures, unless you're referring to the Antichrist Kingdom.

Scripturally, God holds Nations accountable to their own behavior towards God and His scriptures. Sowing and Reaping.

You might want to start with that beam that is in your Canadian eye.

I agree that God does hold nations responsible so why would you think it is right for the US to invade another country?

Do you really believe that God was using the US to judge Maduro?

You may not like the international laws but that is what we have to work with even in this fallen world.

 

[Silverhair]

That is what I mean by morals are held differently by different people.

I believe the US (Canada) had the moral responsibility to liberate the Venezuelan people from Maduro. I believe we had the same responsibility with Cuba decades ago.

The UN declared that Maduro was guilty of crimes against humanity, comdemned his murdering of thousands of Venezuelans.

But did nothing.

If it was just for his crimes against Venezuela I don't think the US would have acted.

His terroristic actions against the US also provided a reason the US should have acted. But I do not think that was the reason.

I believe a significant reason was the power influence Russia and China would have over US and Canada should Maduro retain his hold.

But the US (and Canada) had a moral responsibility to remove Maduro. The UN had the responsibility but could not because of China and Russia.

Actually Maduro had no influence over Canada as the only reason that I can see that Trump invaded and kidnapped Maduro was so they could put a puppet in charge who would do just what the he wanted, sell their oil to the US.

He did not do it for any moral reason just for cash and control.

 

[Silverhair]

Actually Maduro had no influence over Canada as the only reason that I can see that Trum* invaded and kidnapped Maduro was so they could put a puppet in charge who would do just what the he wanted, sell their oil to the US.

He did not do it for any moral reason just for cash and control.

We could go back and forth on this for another 30 or 40 posts and it will not change the reality of the situation.

You see it as justified and I do not. Granted he did just many authoritarian governments have done.

 

[xlsdraw]

I agree that God does hold nations responsible so why would you think it is right for the US to invade another country?

Do you really believe that God was using the US to judge Maduro?

You may not like the international laws but that is what we have to work with even in this fallen world.

You haven't addressed that beam in your Humanist Canadian eye.

 

[Ben1445]

What makes you think I hate POTUS Trump.

Silverhai*, Now it is you who are being silly. If not silly, senile.

I think he has been a very disruptive leaded that has made the US an unreliable trading partner.

You continue to support an illegal action.

You must be right. Shame on Canada for helping the US to do the same thing to Hitler.

The reason international laws work is because nations choose to adhere to them. Rogue nations choose to ignore them. Th US can now be counted as a rogue nation along with Russia, China, North Korea. Real food company Trum* has chosen to keep.

Or they could just be stupid laws.

I have to ask are you now comparing President Trump to God?

That is the dumbest thing you have said yet. I have clearly not. You are just stirring up trouble.

 

[JonC]

Actually Maduro had no influence over Canada as the only reason that I can see that PresidentTrump invaded and kidnapped Maduro was so they could put a puppet in charge who would do just what the he wanted, sell their oil to the US.

He did not do it for any moral reason just for cash and control.

@Silverha**

I know Canadians think Venezuela had nothing to do with Canada. That is why they are so ambivalent about the Venezuelan people.

They viewed Venezuela too far removed to matter. Not really human beings worth the trouble. And they did not see narcoterrorism towards the US as a concern.

This is part of what I mean by Canada becoming such a liberal nation.

Yes, the US and Venezuela stand to benefit from trade deals. But that is merely international economics. It is about borh nations benefiting.

And yes, it is lopsided at this time. Venezuela has much more to gain than the US. But for the US it is an investment that will hopefully become a long term mutual benefit.

The US is doing with Venezuela what you want Canada to do with the EU.

But more importantly is the disruption of terrorism. Cuba furnished military forces and profession personnel in exchange for oil and maintained Venezuela as a major transit corridor for narco-terrorism.

Not only was US a target, but so were major Csnadian cities (not that Canada would care). The Venezuelan oil and drug revenue went to Maduro and his allie through shell companies and to wealonizing terrorist organizations (like the FARC).


I do not believe President Trump acted out of a moral obligation. BUT neither of us can say he did not, or how much or little he did. You are not a mind reader.

Would Canada, if it jad the power to intervene, sit by and allow men like Maduro, Stalin, Hitler, Bin Laden, etc. to oppress and murder their citizens? Maybe not the Canada of the past, but today? Yes. That is what they do. Canada has no moral compass. It is too far gone.

I imagine you are not a liberal by Canadian standards. But you are very liberal by the standards just a few decades ago. You are the frog not realizing it has been boiled.

The US is going that direction. But it is not there yet.

 

[Silverhair]

You haven't addressed that beam in your Humanist Canadian eye.

What beam. I point out the obvious and you try to deny it.

And I should point out that you are not allowed to question another persons salvation as you do when you claim I am a humanist.

 

[Silverhair]

Silverhai*, Now it is you who are being silly. If not silly, senile.

You must be right. Shame on Canada for helping the US to do the same thing to Hitler.



Or they could just be stupid laws.

That is the dumbest thing you have said yet. I have clearly not. You are just stirring up trouble.

@Ben1445 I find in amazing that so many on here will go to such lengths to support illegal actions.

How am I stirring up trouble. I point out the illegal actions and then you defend them.

 

[Silverhair]

@Silverha**

I know Canadians think Venezuela had nothing to do with Canada. That is why they are so ambivalent about the Venezuelan people.

They viewed Venezuela too far removed to matter. Not really human beings worth the trouble. And they did not see narcoterrorism towards the US as a concern.

This is part of what I mean by Canada becoming such a liberal nation.

Yes, the US and Venezuela stand to benefit from trade deals. But that is merely international economics. It is about borh nations benefiting.

And yes, it is lopsided at this time. Venezuela has much more to gain than the US. But for the US it is an investment that will hopefully become a long term mutual benefit.

The US is doing with Venezuela what you want Canada to do with the EU.

But more importantly is the disruption of terrorism. Cuba furnished military forces and profession personnel in exchange for oil and maintained Venezuela as a major transit corridor for narco-terrorism.

Not only was US a target, but so were major Csnadian cities (not that Canada would care). The Venezuelan oil and drug revenue went to Maduro and his allie through shell companies and to wealonizing terrorist organizations (like the FARC).


I do not believe President Trump acted out of a moral obligation. BUT neither of us can say he did not, or how much or little he did. You are not a mind reader.

Would Canada, if it jad the power to intervene, sit by and allow men like Maduro, Stalin, Hitler, Bin Laden, etc. to oppress and murder their citizens? Maybe not the Canada of the past, but today? Yes. That is what they do. Canada has no moral compass. It is too far gone.

I imagine you are not a liberal by Canadian standards. But you are very liberal by the standards just a few decades ago. You are the frog not realizing it has been boiled.

The US is going that direction. But it is not there yet.

All the sudo moralizing you do will not change the reality that the US invaded a sovereign nation. Full stop.

Canada would not invade another country if that is what you mean.

Bin Laden attacked the US, Hitler attacked other nations Japan attacked the US so going after them was justified but what country did Maduro attack. As for the drugs well the drug dealers would not ship them to the US if there were no buyers.

The US did what it did so Trum* could gain control and make money. You do not have to be a mind reader to know it was about the money as he has said that himself. Remember as he said all the money from the sale of oil would go to the US government.

But you are going to defend what he did because you cannot accept the truth as then you would have to admit the US is just another rogue nation.

 

[Ben1445]

@Ben1445 I find in amazing that so many on here will go to such lengths to support illegal actions.

Okay Silverh***, name me the law that was violated. Show me the international code of law and the specific law that was broken.

How am I stirring up trouble. I point out the illegal actions and then you defend them.

Have you not been reading the thread? You don’t know what you say? You are so careless as to not know what you’re doing?

You may play the fool… if you like.

 

[xlsdraw]

What beam. I point out the obvious and you try to deny it.

And I should point out that you are not allowed to question another persons salvation as you do when you claim I am a humanist.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to obsess on the capabilities and actions of men. You clearly don't give God any credit nor glory for His Sovereignty.

I've yet to see you acknowledge God's Sovereignty. International Law is Humanist Law.

 

[JonC]

All the sudo moralizing you do will not change the reality that the US invaded a sovereign nation. Full stop.

Canada would not invade another country if that is what you mean.

@Silverha**

It is not sudu [sic] moralizing.

1. Raid a compound in a foreign country is not the same as invading the nation. Words have meanings.

2. I know Canada would not raid a foreign compound to remove a terrorist and help the nation being oppressed. Canada's moral compass is broken.

The Canada that liberated the Netherlands no longer exists.

Today's Canada would have viewed Nazi Germany as the leading government and the now dead Canada's liberation an invasion of the Netherlands.

The real concern is not how far Canada has moved towards liberalism, how void of moral responsibility it is today, but how quickly old Canada died.


But I suppose words like "invasion of a nation" and "pseudo" have fallen from Canadian vocabulary.

 

[Silverhair]

Okay Silverh***, name me the law that was violated. Show me the international code of law and the specific law that was broken.

@Ben1445 do you think it is lawful to invade a sovereign nation and kidnap a person.

If you do not think that is against the law then what do you think is against thelaw?

Have you not been reading the thread? You don’t know what you say? You are so careless as to not know what you’re doing?

You may play the fool… if you like.

I know what I have been saying and it has not changed even though I have seen some very creative attempts to justify the illegal action of the US.

 

[Silverhair]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to obsess on the capabilities and actions of men. You clearly don't give God any credit nor glory for His Sovereignty.

I've yet to see you acknowledge God's Sovereignty. International Law is Humanist Law.

So you do not think we should have any laws.

 

[Silverhair]

Raid a compound in a foreign country

Note your words. The US raided a compound in a foreign country. Not the US but another sovereign country. That is an invasion.

Canada's moral compass is broken.

Canada's moral compass is just fine but the US moral compass seems to be beyond repair.

You continue to think what the US did was justified.

 

[Ben1445]

@Ben1445 do you think it is lawful to invade a sovereign nation and kidnap a person.

If you do not think that is against the law then what do you think is against thelaw?



I know what I have been saying and it has not changed even though I have seen some very creative attempts to justify the illegal action of the US.

So there is no law you can point to, Silve*h***? You just fabricated it?

 

[Silverhair]

So there is no law you can point to, Silve*h***? You just fabricated it?

@Ben1445 just because I cannot quote you a law does not mean there is not one.

The question you have to answer is why do you think it is morally ok for the US to invade another country and kidnap it's leader?

It seems you Americans will go to any length to justify your rogue leader.

But we have gone back and forth on this and you still support him so live with the consequences.

 

[JonC]

Note your words. The US raided a compound in a foreign country.

Yes. You could say the US invaded a compound. But saying the US invaded a foreign country is a lie.

As Christians we have to be careful with our words. Even though you may say that you are just using liberal arguments, or exaggeration others have used to gain disciples, it is still a lie. Lying is a sin (you are sinning in order to try and make a point that is irrelevant).

You could say the US invaded a compound in Venezuela. But to extend that to Venezuela as a whole is a lie.

You could say Canada liberated the Netherlands. But saying Canada invaded would be a lie.

You could say Canada entered Iran illegally (by violating Irainisn law). But you could not call this an invasion.

Invading a nation is more than raiding a compound within that nation.

When you play with words to support your own agenda (for you it is liberalism, But conservatives do it as well) you sin against God because you are literally lying (you are choosing to use words that mistepresent

The question you have to answer is why do you think it is morally ok for the US to invade another country and kidnap it's leader?

It depends on the situation. I believe it was not only morally "ok" for the US to capture a terrorist who had illegally taken control of Venezuela, who set up a regime of murder and oppression, but I think it was the only moral choice.

I think it was the only moral choice mot only because of Maduro's crimes against Venezuela but also for his crimes against the US snd Canada.

Those who object, who insist Maduro was the legitimate leader of Venezuela, are those who would insist Hitler was the legitimate leader of the Netherlands were that a contemporary situation. But they are wrong.


NOW...speaking of morally right....while the US did the morally right thing, I do not believe they acted out of a moral obligation.

Venezuela was liberated from the takeover of a terrorist. The terroristic actions of Maduro (not only towards Venezuela but also the US and Canada) were ended.

That was morally right, to say otherwise is immoral.

While the reasons for the removal of Maduro were not immoral, I am sure they were out of national interest rather than moral obligation.