| Norris2k said: Two wrongs, lot of wrongs make a precedent. And legally speaking, a precedent is very similar to a law or right. For good or not, what USA did in Irak is : make war to Irak, search dead or alive all the government, make stay its army for years, fought years of guerilla and financed and influenced the new government. So how does Russia sending a few thousand military guys for just a week, without kills or resistance in an area where lot of people are russians could possibly qualify more than that as an annexion ? |
I'm not defending what the US did in Iraq, but they did not annex the country.
What you are saying is that since the US occupied Iraq in suspect of posing a threat or other such pretence, its fair game everywhere. Well, magificent! I think its time Great Britain reclaims all their past provinces. Spain, Portugal, Italy, France, etc. Lets wave those nukes and reclaim what was once theirs!
Your line of thought is about as destructive as it gets.
Again, the US did not annex anything. The US does not own Iraq and for all intents and purposes they deposed a tyrant that was opressing his people (or at least a segment of them).
