woshiblanc 2004-10-22 10:55
打伊拉克合法?
昨天跟朋友吃蟹,聊到伊拉克。他说的一个细节倒是很有意思,那就是92年的海湾战争根本没有结束,当时只是签署了停火协议之类的东西,而且前提是伊拉克每年要接受核查,否则。。。
这样说来,这次打最起码在法理上,美国是完全合法的了。
另外他说日本二战的天皇诏书也仅仅说是要日本人停止抵抗,可战争,,,晕得我。
蓝蔻 2004-10-22 16:53
Re:打伊拉克合法?
联合国宪章上规定除了自卫,任何武力都是非法的
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 08:57
Re:Re:打伊拉克合法?
[quote]
[b]蓝蔻: Re:打伊拉克合法?[/b]
联合国宪章上规定除了自卫,任何武力都是非法的[/quote]
AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
to [b]unite our strength to maintain international peace and security,[/b] and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,
<!-- CETagParser ~url
<a href="http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/" target=_blank>http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/<!-- CETagParser ~/url
</a>
读读书再来说。
柯林斯 2004-10-23 09:07
Re:打伊拉克合法?
蓝蔻的说法不完全正确,根据联合国宪章,经过安理会的授权而采取军事行动,在性质上也是合法的。
楼主说法也有问题。根据传统的战争法理论,战争的开始要有宣战的行为,战争的结束可以单方面宣布结束战争状态,也可以双方协商结束战争。但是自二战以来,大量的战争或是武装冲突不仅事发突然,而且交战方出于政治上的考虑,也不再进行宣战行为(还有一个较为重要的因素,是交战方意图避开战争法的约束)。所以,朝鲜战争、越南战争、中东战争、乃至海湾战争都没有宣战的举动或者声明,因此,严格意义上来讲,都不能称其为战争。所以,现代战争法体系中,武装冲突法的比重逐渐增加。
第一次海湾战争(准确的称呼应该是“海湾地区武装冲突”)应当是在伊拉克宣布接受联合国相关决议而宣告正式结束。
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 09:10
Re:打伊拉克合法?
..那说美国人延用上次的授权,大概也算个理由了。。。
柯林斯 2004-10-23 09:18
Re:打伊拉克合法?
上一次联合国的授权仅限于恢复科威特的主权和领土完整,
以及维护海湾地区的安定局势,只要科威特顺利恢复了主权,
决议的这一部分就没什么约束力了。
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 09:29
Re:Re:打伊拉克合法?
[quote]
[b]柯林斯: Re:打伊拉克合法?[/b]
以及维护海湾地区的安定局势,[/quote]
明白了。
柯林斯 2004-10-23 09:46
Re:打伊拉克合法?
呵呵~~又想从中为美国找借口了。
战争法不是我强项,不和你争论了:)
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 09:52
Re:打伊拉克合法?
[quote]
一旦绕开奥斯丁“法律三位一体说”的实质理性残余,形式理性化之路立即一马平川;从奥斯丁的“法律主导术语”到费霍尔德的八个“基本法律概念”,从奥斯丁的“一般法理学”到凯尔森的“纯粹法学”,一切都变得清晰明朗了。于是,自由也从freedom,从一个神学、哲学和人类学的概念,变成了liberty,变成一个法律的概念。奥斯丁的学生萨尔蒙德(John Salmond)认为,法律自由(liberties)是从加在我身上的法律义务空缺中推演出来的利益,而权利(rights)是加在他人身上义务的一种利益。王怡写道:“我倾向于相信历史上的华莱士,临死前并不会高呼freedom。因为英国人的优点就是远离激情,没有把这种抽象价值挂在嘴边的习气。”(参见王怡:《自由的观念:绕开一个正义的柠檬》,《读书》2002年第6期)我的看法恰恰相反,作为苏格兰独立运动领袖的华莱士,若在身受凌迟酷刑的情况下呼唤法定自由(liberty),肯定是神智不清了。[/quote]
嘿嘿,只是为了更深看透美帝的鬼蜮伎俩。
不过拜托你多规矩下这版面,学法的人就不要到处找些二手的东西,信口开河了。
柯林斯 2004-10-23 10:06
Re:打伊拉克合法?
我很快就不做斑竹了。
呵呵~~大家学习的深度和兴趣点本来就不同,
而且网络上嘛,就不要求那么高了。
但是,学习法律真的应该十分严谨才行。
以后,多到俺们板块来
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 10:31
Re:打伊拉克合法?
Steps: according to Miland Brown in <!-- CETagParser ~url
<a href="http://www.libraryreference.org/gulfwar.html" target=_blank>http://www.libraryreference.org/gulfwar.html<!-- CETagParser ~/url
</a>
August 2nd, 1990 Iraqi military forces invaded and occupied the small Arab state of Kuwait.
Early August 1990, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia invited American troops onto Saudi soil. He had seen Kuwait's destiny; therefore, he wanted protection. It was also the interest of the USA to stop any further advantage of the Iraqi army. The deployment was called-------Operation Desert Shield---------. These troops were armed with light, defensive weaponry.
November 8, 1990 President Bush announced a military buildup to provide an offensive option, ---------Operation Desert Storm----------, to force Iraq out of Kuwait. The preparation of the operation took two and a half months and it involved a massive air- and sea lift.
January 15, 1991The United Nations Security Council passed 12 resolutions condemning the invasion. The ultimate decision was to use military force if Iraq did not withdraw unconditionally.
January 1991, the U. S. Congress voted to support------Security Council resolution 660----------. It authorized using "all necessary means" if Iraq did not withdraw from Kuwait by January 15. Shrugging off this final warning, Saddam Hussein resolutely maintained the occupation of Kuwait.
President George Bush waited two days after the UN deadline for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait before ordering the Coalition to begin action against Iraq. The winds of Desert Storm began howling across Iraq on January 17, 1991, at 2.30 am Baghdad time.
The ground war began at 8:00 p.m. on February 23 and lasted exactly 100 hours.
President Bush's decision to terminate the ground war at midnight February 28, 1991 was criticized,because it allowed Baghdad to rescue a large amount of military equipment and personnel that were later used to suppress the postwar rebellions of its Shiite and Kurdish citizens. In his own defense, the president asserted that the war had accomplished its mandate. The mission, given by the Security Council, was to expel the Iraqi forces from Kuwait and reestablish Kuwaiti independence. Bush's decision was probably influenced by his desire to maintain coalition unity. A particular reason was to keep on board the Arab members, who were increasingly unhappy at the devastation inflicted on Iraq's infrastructure and civilian population.
Iraqi representatives accepted allied terms for a provisional truce on March 3 and a permanent <!-- CETagParser ~size=6
<font size=6>[b]cease-fire[/b]<!-- CETagParser ~/size
</font> on April 6. Iraq agreed to pay reparations to Kuwait, reveal the location and extent of its stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and eliminate its weapons of mass destruction. Subsequently, however, UN inspectors complained that the Baghdad government was frustrating their attempts to monitor Iraqi compliance, and UN sanctions against Iraq were kept in place.
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 10:37
Re:打伊拉克合法?
1991年1月17日凌晨以美国为首的多国部队开始轰炸巴格达,拉开了海湾战争的序幕。2月28日上午停火。
4月7日美国、英国和法国在伊拉克北部设立第一个“禁飞区”。
1997年3月26日联合国武器核查人员7年来第一次对伊拉克属于“总统用地”的场所进行武器核查。
1999年12月17日联合国安理会通过1284号决议,成立联合国对伊拉克武器核查、检查和观察委员会,但遭伊拉克拒绝。
2000年8月10日委内瑞拉总统乌戈?查韦斯成为自海湾战争以来到访伊拉克的第一位国家元首。
2001年1月8日联合国秘书长安南表示,联合国与伊拉克就武器核查问题展开的新一轮对话最早将于2001年2月才能在纽约联合国总部举行。
woshiblanc 2004-10-23 10:46
Re:打伊拉克合法?
For the universal one, please turn to <!-- CETagParser ~url
<a href="http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/1990/scres90.htm" target=_blank>http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/1990/scres90.htm<!-- CETagParser ~/url
</a>
Security Council resolution 660
<!-- CETagParser ~url
<a href="http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/peace/docs/scres660.html" target=_blank>http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/peace/docs/scres660.html<!-- CETagParser ~/url
</a>
United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (Condemning the Invasion of Kuwait by Iraq), S.C. res. 660, 45 U.N. SCOR at 19, U.N. Doc. S/RES/660 (1990).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adopted by the Security Council at its 2932nd meeting, on 2 August 1990
The Security Council,
Alarmed by the invasion of Kuwait on 2 August 1990 by the military forces of Iraq,
Determining that there exists a breach of international peace and security as regards the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait,
Acting under Articles 39 and 40 of the Charter of the United Nations,
1. Condemns the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait;
2. Demands that Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990;
3. Calls upon Iraq and Kuwait to begin immediately intensive negotiations for the resolution of their differences and supports all efforts in this regard, and especially those of the League of Arab States;
4. Decides to meet again as necessary to consider further steps with to ensure compliance with the present resolution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
洁洁 2004-10-27 21:05
Re:打伊拉克合法?
楼上,我晕了
柯林斯 2004-10-28 08:34
Re:打伊拉克合法?
这是联合国安理会关于伊拉克问题的660号决议。
其主旨在于谴责伊拉克的入侵行动,并要求伊拉克军队立即无条件的
撤回到1990年8月1日之前的位置上去,也就是撤出科威特的领土,
呼吁双方通过谈判解决彼此之间的争议等等。
wqyitian 2004-12-5 13:29
Re:打伊拉克合法?
诸位学法学的同人,可以法律堆里找根据,这是很有用的。
应该说这场战争是不合法的,没有联合国授权。这是从联合国的角度来考虑的。
从主权国家的角度来看,我认为主权是国家的基本权利,因此即使有联合国授权,对一个主权国家动武也是不合法的。否则,就没有国际行为的底线了。
我反对人权大于主权,因为这不利于现在的中国。我很实用。
本人不学法律,因此有些问题只是自己的理解。
comehere 2004-12-5 23:04
Re:打伊拉克合法?
我认为联合国的章程未必就必须能约制各成员国的行为,因为联合国甚至连邦联的特征都不具备。法在国际事务中并不能成为必然的约制,因为没有临驾于其上的强力或授权。一个体制能持续保持领先,在一段时期里它就是先进的,不得不被落后体制(被迫)承认,因为当今社会的发展造成的人、财、物的流动使得那些试图强化种族、国家、家族、宗派的封闭式机制逐步退缩,活得不自在的人想换个环境,活得自在的人想拓张发展,人人都在挣脱约束寻找更广阔的空间。一个蔑视人权的国家最终将自食其果,被它所压迫的自己人所颠覆(纳粹德国的种族理论几乎将这个民族自己毁灭)。正如法官Learned Hand曾经说过的:自由活在每个人的心底,如果它在那儿死去,没有一部宪法,没有一条法律,没有一个法庭,能让它起死回生。
雅各 2004-12-8 14:06
Re:打伊拉克合法?
打得真好啊~~~
嘿嘿嘿~~~~
页:
[1]