How To Unclog A Marine Head

Learning from the Georgia conflict

criticism, " conviction " and " punishment "

Georgia's military offensive on the night of 8:08:08 for the purpose of "repatriation" of the ruled by apostates and Russia South Ossetia, I judged them to be irresponsible towards the civilian population and as culpable risk world peace - http://georgien-konflikt.blogspot.com

That this war with Russia " provoked " had been, can be read for years already although only on the basis of Russian policy statements, however, justify any conflict escalation, and only quite a war.

Consequently, the expressions of solidarity and the prospect asked NATO membership for Georgia, while "condemnation of Russia" by NATO, EU and dt an unacceptable federal government siding with the war crimes of Georgia's government.

Moscow accuses NATO of double standards against the deal, even if the NATO countries the comparability of the Kosovo conflict and deny Georgia conflict, but support any covert or open separatism militarily as soon as the expansion of NATO power promises to bring about. It

"Although each case is different," but also fairness in individual cases is of him only when NATO finally defined their standards by which they would like to see judges the cases generalizable. Without legal standards remains NATO's policy barbarism, power politics and international law, along with the trend to continue or revive the Cold War with Russia. However, Georgia needs

Moscow's policy of condemnation by world opinion and the United Nations, which it always should take a chance on a Russian veto in the Security Council.

In contrast to Merkel and Steinmeier's statements see the Russian war as justified under international law if they ante defend or restore the status quo was necessary because Georgia had not been with requests moved to withdraw, but would have the part of NATO probably get backing.

But defense is defense, not "punishment" to which arrogated to itself the Russian President Medvedev called several times in speeches and Russian troops allowed to penetrate the core Georgian territory, are residential areas from the air and with tanks under fire took the guerrillas of the separatist back cover for looting and arson military protection offered.

Moscow and all the world should learn that "punishment" by governments may not exist at all, but to be up to independent courts is to ensure a fair hearing and defense, speak sentences. And only then, states may "execute sentences. Everything else is barbarism, as well as "international customary law" is nothing more than apply to any other common law bad habit is no legal basis. This is the prevailing opinion in the law, even under the international law experts.

What should his sentence tenor?

in case Moscow should at least replace the damage from the military or under the protection of Russian military civilians added. Including pensions for invalids and survivors of civilians killed.
need to determine the damage it international legal studies and case-decision when the Russian government understands not regulate itself to the individual cases in and out of court settlement with the injured. Russia has to adhere
for the killings and damage from the guerrillas if they can not be determined, because it bears the responsibility Moscow, that such hordes were able to ride on the running board of the Russian mega-military or would they have to take in the military discipline of the Russian army.

In ruling against Georgia would have to be civil liability for victim compensation also killed military aggressor and robbery would otherwise treated equally inadmissible.

On the difference between punishment and reparations

first war reparations to make as expensive as the wars are expensive and as far as possible to those who borrow them. The cost of the war can be not just to the budget figures for Military quantify, but far more the military effects.

But because war is no "accident", or otherwise as a result of "total disregard of due diligence", but planned and carried out crimes on a large scale, although the reality of war in accordance with the war planning never be sure about reparations and compensation also certainly also "punishment" be, would be punished for civil legal systems often even for mere negligence.

World politics must not be less than civil politics in any civil or less ordered state.

How should the punishment be (possible)?

If war criminals tangible, they are now from tribunals such as the International Criminal Court. There they are convicted. If necessary for life.

Greifbar are war criminals only if they do not like, for example, enjoy George W. Bush, Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin regime and the protection of their populations, but fell into disfavor and sufficient in the hands of their adversaries, if they do not murder but want to put on trial.

The populations of these war criminals will always have a tendency to protect their war against conviction and punishment, because they would be too big a concern to have joint liability for government crimes, but liability for "institutions" is, there is no reasonable alternative, already not in the ordinary law and therefore not as far as possible in international law.

Such knowledge and development processes are cumbersome, can be not to force or avoid. And that's why I keep people like Bush, Putin, Saakashvili continued in Berlin "welcome", although not as cordial, but for diplomatic reasons: "always welcome" - Because we need to talk.

So if war crimes for reasons of their power are not to engage or capture would not be appropriate to mitigate conflict, then instead of punishing the call to be governed, that to replace them kindly to choose their governments and by which, the law with and create.

This call must first apply to us Germans, for Merkel and Steinmeier will not be convinced that the international policy must be bound by law, but want to continue to collaborate with the war criminal Saakashvili.
And would not the case, Saakashvili said would have most likely not even a war criminal. People would live to be buried now.

-Mark Rabago->> discussion

Inmate Death Masterbation

How useful is the "C" of CDU and CSU?

The "C" stands for Christian, but Christians in the CDU / CSU are probably of little better than the non-party Christians and Christians of other parties.

The "C" claim and obligation .
people who make such a claim, should be judged on it and always remember.
example: Would Jesus sit down in a bomber?

whom "make Christian politics" as a claim is too high, because "without a sword" is not to make policy, it seems to me, is this / his policies but not "Christian" name. That would remain false labeling and also from religious point of view of the abuse of God cover (see 1.Gebot).

to "C" is also the question of whether a people's party at all religious should be defined - or think you would have to ensure what is that an "M" party (= Muslim party) is not politically automatically compete, but cooperate. What would mean the CDU members, if a "Muslim party" established? How would Christians feel if they are to join a Muslim party? How do you feel Muslims are to join the "C" Union?

Who sensitivity to such questions? It needs it. Otherwise, works no integration policy.

In other words, I consider it within the meaning of Christianity is not desirable that the parties are committed all sorts of vile and power struggles and missiles are to seek religious titles.
And I think religious denominations not to be compatible / consistent with the required secularity of the state.

clubs may be called that, but not parties whose Selbstvertändnisse and constitutional role offered to the secular state are required.

Humanity learned in recent decades, added a lot. We also learned German to do so. Thus, one should have the power of love is meant habits to adopt when they are not so fond of, but unnecessarily split the society.

-markus rabanus-2001/2008>> discussions