Yes, legal analysts does tend to require a little thought

Instead of the usual glib snides below

Anyway, here’s a super-potted version

“ International law evolves through state practice; it is not a rigid relic. If interpreted to leave law-abiding states defenceless against persistent aggression, it becomes worse than useless.

Iran has waged a decades-long unconventional war against the West through proxies and terrorism, constituting an ongoing armed conflict governed by the laws of war. Article 51 permits anticipatory self-defence against an imminent nuclear threat; states need not await catastrophe. Customary law also recognises humanitarian intervention against brutal regimes.

Thus US and Israeli action is morally and legally justified, and Britain should support it rather than hide behind narrow, paralysing readings of the UN Charter.”

Posted By: Old Git, Mar 2, 19:17:23