• Lmaydev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The UN Security Council, as outlined in Article 39 of the UN Charter, has the ability to rule on the legality of the war, but has yet not been asked by any UN member nation to do so. The United States and the United Kingdom have veto power in the Security Council, so action by the Security Council is highly improbable even if the issue were to be raised.

    No one cares and even if they did it can be vetoed.

    Countries shouldn’t be able to veto things about themselves. That’s stupid.

    • dsmk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Even if you remove the veto power, what exactly would you expect to happen?

      Bush wasn’t going to be arrested and put under an international court for the same reason Putin isn’t going to be arrested for invading Ukraine. You can tell them “hand him over”, they say “make me”, and the only way to enforce the decision involves war, which no one wants to have.

      The veto power is a problem, but it’s not the main problem here.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The main problem is thinking the UN is supposed to be like this higher authority. That isn’t and never was the intention, because it’s impossible for it to be.

        • kbotc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yep. The UN isn’t the world government. It’s a place for the super powers to air their grievances for the rest of the world to see.

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s stupid

      Duh, but that’s the point of the council, to ensure they can’t do anything.