@jeffw to World NewsEnglish • 9 months agoAre embassies off-limits? Ecuadorian and Israeli actions suggest otherwise − and that sets a dangerous diplomatic precedenttheconversation.comexternal-linkmessage-square33arrow-up1232arrow-down15
arrow-up1227arrow-down1external-linkAre embassies off-limits? Ecuadorian and Israeli actions suggest otherwise − and that sets a dangerous diplomatic precedenttheconversation.com@jeffw to World NewsEnglish • 9 months agomessage-square33
minus-square@AltofaltceptionlinkEnglish4•9 months agoSo by your logic Al Quaeda was okay to attack the US consulate in Benghazi as they were not the host nation. Regardless, my point is that how Mexico responds is up to Mexico, not the “civilized world”. Sure, but the civilized world can speak about it, instead of crickets at the UN Security Council. As for Mexico and Ecuador, please see below: https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/06/americas/ecuador-vice-president-arrest-mexico-embassy-diplomatic-tensions-intl-hnk/index.html
minus-square@FlowVoidlinkEnglish0•9 months agoAttacking the US consulate was not a violation of international law. Especially since al-Qaeda never signed any international treaties. However, the attack could be considered an act of war. The same is true of attacks by Israel and Iranian proxies.
So by your logic Al Quaeda was okay to attack the US consulate in Benghazi as they were not the host nation.
Sure, but the civilized world can speak about it, instead of crickets at the UN Security Council.
As for Mexico and Ecuador, please see below:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/06/americas/ecuador-vice-president-arrest-mexico-embassy-diplomatic-tensions-intl-hnk/index.html
Attacking the US consulate was not a violation of international law. Especially since al-Qaeda never signed any international treaties.
However, the attack could be considered an act of war. The same is true of attacks by Israel and Iranian proxies.