> mostly due to the cost of funding the defense of the illegal war in Ukraine
What is a "legal" war supposed to be?
A war would be legal when the _casus belli_ leading up to it would be a non-military action.
For example, Egypt might have casus belli if Sudan stopped the Nile's flow, a non military action with significant impact.
War is illegal under the international law for all UN member states. The main exceptions are self defense or when authorized by the UN Security Council.
Of course, nobody really cares about that.
Was the idea here that because the UN declares that war is illegal, that no country will do war anymore?
I mean, wtf.
After WW1 and WW2 and with the threat of nuclear war, people were willing to try any amount of talking as a less horrific option.
A war would be legal when the _casus belli_ leading up to it would be a non-military action.
For example, Egypt might have casus belli if Sudan stopped the Nile's flow, a non military action with significant impact.
War is illegal under the international law for all UN member states. The main exceptions are self defense or when authorized by the UN Security Council.
Of course, nobody really cares about that.
Was the idea here that because the UN declares that war is illegal, that no country will do war anymore?
I mean, wtf.
After WW1 and WW2 and with the threat of nuclear war, people were willing to try any amount of talking as a less horrific option.