1) first a resolution by congress to ask"dictator" to step down peacefully
a)Ask United Nations to maintain peace using "United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970"
2)United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970:
>The remainder of the resolution was enacted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and Article 41, thus making its provisions legally ENFORCABLE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1970
3) Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and Article 41
>sets out the UN Security Council's powers to maintain peace. It allows the Council to "determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression" and to take military and nonmilitary action to "restore international peace and security".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapter_VII_of_the_United_Nations_Charter
------------------------------------
for 1) and 2) resource look at example in Libya:
>S.Res.85 — 112th Congress (2011-2012)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-resolution/85/summary/00
-----------------
Bonus point, guess who was one of the 10 senators to CO-SPONSOR this.
self Bump.
Anybody wanna put their 2 cents?
>>70673831
Go be irrelevant somewhere else
>>70673831
I am a masters student of international law and i still don't understand what you're trying to say.
Yes, I am familiar with the laws in question.
>>70673831
>Bonus point, guess who was one of the 10 senators to CO-SPONSOR this.
McCain? Dunno
>>70675964
Senator Bernie Sanders.
"Regime change is bad"
>>70675859
what do you mean you don't understand. I've laid out the exact laws. IF you go to a liberal university here it is written for children:
-The Senate gives approval to security council of United Nations which can enforce "peace-making "under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and Article 41".
Now under that chapter, it pretty much says let's get our military together and fuck the shit out that country and make it do what we want.
>>70677671
>Now under that chapter, it pretty much says let's get our military together and fuck the shit out that country and make it do what we want.
No it doesn't.
To pass anything in the Security Council a 9/15 majority is necessary, with none of the 5 permanent members voting against it. So if China or Russia doesn't like what the US is trying to do, they can veto it. Always.
What's more, UN peacekeeping is based on the consent of involved parties. So no, maintaining peace is not a reason for forcibly intervening.
>>70678385
How can they veto it? Because resolution 1973 which was the intervention resolution was opposed by Brazil, Germany, and India, and permanent members China and Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1973
>>70679965
Voting summary
10 voted for
None voted against
5 abstained
>>70673831
How about we leave the UN and do what we want?
>>70680158
Yeah but this way you can do what you want with the title "peace, and democracy"
>>70680066
Fuck. I can't believe I missed that important detail.
So why did they abstain their vote? Is there pressure on them or something? Russia and china knew this was just to help U.S interests and not to reserve peace.
Also I'm reading the veto rule is weird. It's not black and white.. apparently they have to have "convincing" opposition to veto something. Who decides what is convincing?
>>70680066
Also the resolution that Bernie Sanders brought to senate:
(1) applauds the courage of the Libyan people in standing up against the brutal dictatorship of Muammar Gadhafi and for demanding democratic reforms, transparent governance, and respect for basic human and civil rights;
(2) strongly condemns the gross and systematic violations of human rights in Libya, including violent attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms;
(3) calls on Muammar Gadhafi to desist from further violence, recognize the Libyan people's demand for democratic change, resign his position and permit a peaceful transition to democracy governed by respect for human and civil rights and the right of the people to choose their government in free and fair elections;
(4) calls on the Gadhafi regime to immediately release persons that have been arbitrarily detained, to cease the intimidation, harassment and detention of peaceful protestors, human rights defenders and journalists, to ensure civilian safety, and to guarantee access to human rights and humanitarian organizations;
(1/2)
(1/3)***
>>70680066
(5) welcomes the unanimous vote of the United Nations Security Council on resolution 1970 referring the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court, imposing an arms embargo on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, freezing the assets of Gadhafi and family members, and banning international travel by Gadhafi, members of his family, and senior advisors;
(6) urges the Gadhafi regime to abide by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 and ensure the safety of foreign nationals and their assets, and to facilitate the departure of those wishing to leave the country as well as the safe passage of humanitarian and medical supplies, humanitarian agencies and workers, into Libya in order to assist the Libyan people;
(7) urges the United Nations Security Council to take such further action as may be necessary to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory;
(8) welcomes the African Union's condemnation of the `disproportionate use of force in Libya' and urges the Union to take action to address the human rights crisis in Libya and to ensure that member states, particularly those bordering Libya, are in full compliance with the arms embargo imposed by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including the ban on the provision of armed mercenary personnel;
(2/3)
>>70680066
(9) welcomes the decision of the United Nations Human Rights Council to recommend Libya's suspension from the Council and urges the United Nations General Assembly to vote to suspend Libya's rights of membership in the Council;
(10) welcomes the attendance of Secretary of State Clinton at the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva and 1) urges the Council's assumption of a country mandate for Libya that employs a Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Libya and 2) urges the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations to advocate for improving United Nations Human Rights Council membership criteria at the next United Nations General Assembly in New York City to exclude gross and systematic violators of human rights; and
(11) welcomes the outreach that has begun by the United States Government to Libyan opposition figures and supports an orderly, irreversible transition to a legitimate democratic government in Libya.
(3/3)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:S.RES.85:
Is this a peaceful request of Gadhafi to step down? Or is it asking to use military intervention
>>70681082
They don't veto because they are letting the conventional votes decide on the matter if they do not feel strongly about it or have other stakes in it. There's no limit to the veto power.
>>70681573
I don't really understand what you're asking.
It is both asking Qaddafi to resign and urging the UN to use force if his regime does cease its human rights violations.
>>70682340
I just want to debunk that Sanders is against regime change while he cosponsored that resolution.
>>70683731
Bernie has supported almost all regime change.
>>70684247
Why didn't his resolution get stopped by Rand Paul or at least one person? Why'd it pass unanimously?
>>70673831
That pic is a mannequin right?
>>70673831
China and Russia both have permanent veto power on the UN Security Council, and you'd also be stupid to think that we give two shits what they think. We don't need their permission to free the shit out of any one.
>>70684950
I would also like to know.
>>70685000
well why didn't the Russians or Chinese veto this?
I don't understand. They didn't even oppose it. They just withheld their vote.
>>70684898
You don't need no fucking masters degree in international law to understand that politicians, wealthy people, etc. are all connected in this corruption game. Shit can pass unanimously because they are all on the same team and they could care less about one stupid goy with no power stopping their decisions.
>>70681082
Putin wasn't president.
>>70685422
China has interests in Africa that is not mentioned on the western MSM so much. Why would they give two fucks about Libya when they are running businesses and digging for gold down south? China and Russia would rather not deal with muslims too so it makes sense. They already saw Libya was the west's land to fuck with.
>>70685602
>>70685948
Yeah but getting rid off Gadhafi would help U.S petro Dollar, so doesn't it make sense to weaken ur competition? In other words, shouldn't they have at least opposed or veto it?
>>70685659
You think he would've vetoed it?
