1. Violationof the United Nations Charter
- The United Nations (UN) Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is widely seen as a violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits acts of aggression against another sovereign state.
Widelyseen by whom? Im not the first to pick you upon this absurd "widely seen"remark.
Americaand its vassals are not the majority of the world and their assessment of whatis and isnt legal is not impartial but driven by self-interest. Indeed themajority of the world, the global south (including China, India, Indonesia)believe the obvious truth that Russia was acting in self defence, just asAmerica claimed it was doing when it invaded Iraq in 2003, JFK during the Cubanmissile crisis and America again when it attacked Serbia claiming to bedefending Kosovo (like Russia defending the Russian population of Donbas etc)
2. Lackof Legitimate Self-Defense or UN Authorization
- Under international law, the use of force is only justified in cases of self-defense or when authorized by the UN Security Council. Russia's actions do not meet the criteria for self-defense, as there was no armed attack by Ukraine on Russia. Furthermore, the invasion was not authorized by the UN Security Council.
First,Ukraine was conducting an armed attack on Russian people in Donbas etc and itsalways been recognised that a country can step in and use force to stop themass killing of its people. America/NATO claimed that right when it attackedSerbia, even though it wasn't Americans but Kosovans it claimed to beprotecting (in truth it was just another American/NATO pretext to destroy Yugoslavia)
Second,where does Article 2(4) say the country must be attacked before it can act inself defense. You just invented that. In fact it prohibits "the threat or useof force". So if your threatened you can defend yourself. Again the sameas America did in the Iraq war and JFK used force at the threat of Russianmissiles in Cuba.
Butthe truth is (and you know this) that Article 2(4) is meaningless and all countries(esp America and Israel) invoke it in whatever way it suites them to justifywhatever they want to do. For every country that says something is legal under2(4) there's another country that says its illegal. Russia had a legal &moral right to attack to defend itself rather than wait for the USA/NATO/Ukraineto finish their preparations by which time it would have been too late forRussia.
3. Violationof Ukraine's Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity
- The invasion undermines the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity enshrined in international law. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the subsequent invasion and occupation of parts of Ukraine are seen as breaches of Ukraine's recognized borders and sovereignty.
This is silly! Again,"areseen" by whom? America/NATO, according to what their interests are thisweek. Russia was acting in self defense and the defense of Russian people inUkraine. In WW2 did the allies violate Germany's sovereignty and territorial integritywhen they invaded to protect themselves against Nazi aggression? As for Crimeawe can argue that till the cows come home. Crimea belongs to Russia and hasdone for centuries. The administrative anomaly in 1956 that put Crimea inUkraine's hands is something Russia was prepared to accept until Ukraine triedto use it to turn over to NATO and complete Russia's encirclement. Good forRussia they did the right thing.
4. Breachof the Budapest Memorandum (1994)
- Under the Budapest Memorandum, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom committed to respecting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal. Russia's invasion is seen as a breach of this agreement.
Oh,as if that nuclear arsenal belonged to Ukraine. It just happened to be therebut it was built and paid for primarily by Russia. It belonged to Russia andthe guarantee's re "sovereignty and territorial integrity" wereobviously subject to Ukraine not threatening and using force against Russia.Did you cut and paste this crap. I bet you did.
OHand thank god they took those nuclear weapons off Ukraine, the most corruptpeople in all of Europe. Can you imagine how many tin pot countires and terroristgroups would have ICBMs now if the Ukrainians got their hands on that nuclear arsenal.
5. WarCrimes and Violations of International Humanitarian Law
- Reports of attacks on civilian infrastructure, use of prohibited weapons, and other alleged war crimes during the conflict violate international humanitarian law, which governs the conduct of war and protects civilians.
Wheneverthere's a war the combatants and their supporters are always making claims of thiskind against each other. But I tell you what Russia's conduct of this war has been exemplary in comparison to the monstrous violations against civilians and human rights by Ukraine and America's usual behaviour when it conducts war
6. Condemnationby the International Community
- The majority of the international community, including the UN General Assembly, has condemned Russia's actions as an act of aggression and a violation of international law. Several resolutions have called for the immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine.
- Again America and its vassals are not the majority of the international community and frankly the UN General Assembly and Security Council is no moral or legal authority of anything in my opinion.
