As promised, here are the key points from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has spoken to US media outlets this morning.
- This is “not a war against Venezuela”, he says - this follows strikes on the country on Saturday and the extraction of its president, Nicolás Maduro
- The US will judge Venezuela by “what they do” next, Rubio says, adding that Washington will keep “multiple levers of leverage” to protect its interests
- Speaking to ABC, Rubio says congressional authorisation wasn’t needed before the operation “because this wasn’t an invasion”
- He says that he hopes Maduro’s removal will lead to “a better Venezuela”, but adds that the “number one objective is America”
- Asked whether he thinks Interim President Delcy Rodríguez is now the legitimate president of Venezuela, he says the US does not believe the regime is legitimate
Iran is not at war with Israel.
China is not at war with Taiwan.
Gotta conform to what the lying propagandists you trust are saying, amirite?
Did Iran invade Israel and I missed it?
Didn’t the israelis launch an illegal unprovoked war on Iran in June?
Iran supplies weapons to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, chant “death to Israel” while enriching uranium for building nuclear weapons.
“Unprovoked” LOL.
israel supplies weapons to terrorists in Iran and Syria, posseses nuclear weapons, and refuses IAEA inspections, and is committing genocide in Palestine. What’s your point?
Totally agree on China and Taiwan. China is just waiting until they are sure they can invade without a lot of international attention (which trump is not helping)
Whats the Iran Isreal bit? Something new I missed? Or just the general tensions and on and again off again spots?
He is spouting hasbara.
Yes, China is indeed not at war with Taiwan… yet. They are however happily watching and realising that it’s a) okay now to attack a sovereign country and just pretend it isn’t a war and b) everyone seems to give a fuck about international law and prefers to stay silent. That’s yet another thing off of their list of reasons why they should not attack Taiwan.
Regarding Iran… if you want to argue that low scale bullshit, threats and financing of opponents is already war, you are free to do so. But if your bar is that low, be at least fair and acknowledge that Russia (and to a slightly lesser degree the US and China) are in fact at war with most countries right now.
The ICJ called for the arrest of Putin and Netanyahu. The US saw this and realised that it’s now ok to arrest the leader of a sovereign country.
China is currently conducting military operations in Taiwan which is technically not a sovereign country. Taiwan exists as a defacto independent country based on the strategic ambiguity that that US might defend it if were attacked by China. According to international law that would be the US going to war with China over internal Chinese dispute. So technically speaking, defending democratic Taiwan from aggression from an authoritarian regime may be against international law.
Iran gives material support to terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. These terrorist groups use weapons supplied by Iran to attack Israel (and in the case of the Houthis basically any country they feel like). Many people have been killed by Iranian weapons. Iran is most certainly engaged in a proxy war against Israel. This includes the genocidal massacre that occurred on October 7, 2023. Iran is complicit in genocide, but I guess that’s ok according to international law.
You see, international law is more of a vibe than anything real. The UN is made up of people, many of whom are appointed by very corrupt countries and what is against international law is probably just decided cliques in the cafeteria in the UN HQ.
Like really, what is the basis that’s used to determine which world leaders you think it’s acceptable to arrest? Just your feelings on who you like and who you don’t like? That’s not how legal systems are supposed to work you know.
The only difference between the actions of the UN and the actions of the US is the US actually has the power to actually arrest world leaders and the UN does not.
Why am I not surprised that you don’t understand the difference between a court and a government, much less between the International Court of Justice legitimised by the countries agreeing about its jurisdiction and a “Fuck the law, international and domestic, and any jurisdiction because I just do whatever I want”-wannabe dictator?
Maduro was indicted in a federal court.
Why am I not surprised you think only courts that indict the people you don’t like are legitimate? Why is it fundamentally different for a US court to do something different from a UN court? Other than the fact the UN court isn’t capable of actually arresting foreign leaders and the leaders they indict are people you don’t like. For the law to be legitimate, it should just prosecute the people it’s popular to go after. There’s plenty of dictators in the world that have done far worse than Netanyahu, where are the arrest warrants?
The ICJ is making political moves and that’s not what justice is supposed to be about and damages it’s legitimacy. The fact that actions by the US that are basically identical to the ICJ’s actions are labeled authoritarian, colonialist, actions of a rogue state, just goes to prove the illegtimacy of the the ICJ. You can’t have it both ways, either courts can indict foreign leaders and countries can execute arrests on them or they can’t. And it shouldn’t be down to a court conforming to political opinions, justice is subservient to politics is not justice at all. The ICJ seems intent on using it’s power to effect political change, same as Trump.
Look up “jurisdiction”…
deleted by creator