• @Badass_panda
      link
      English
      21 year ago

      That’s how it normally works, yes… particularly if the country in question is not a signatory to the ‘international law’ in question.

        • @Badass_panda
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That they can issue court orders to companies that do business in their territory?

          They … they know…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            That domestic policy supercedes international law? That’s literally been the entire argument for sanctions against China: that their domestic policy violates international law and that under the rules-based international order someone needs to do something about it.

            • @Badass_panda
              link
              English
              11 year ago

              Sorry I am finding it very difficult to follow your argument.

              Can you explain what “international law” you believe US sanctions to have broken?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                Other way around: the US is projecting international law on domestic issues that, as we’ve already established, should be governed by domestic policy before falling to international law.

                As we’ve already established, condemnation and punitive actions against a country for unilateral domestic policy decisions doesn’t make sense, even if they are in violation of international law.

                • @Badass_panda
                  link
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Bro I’ve been on roundabouts less circular than your logic