| Revision as of 01:31, 14 April 2008 editPocopocopocopoco (talk | contribs)Rollbackers3,882 edits reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:35, 14 April 2008 edit undoJayjg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators134,922 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| ::I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. ] (]) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | ::I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. ] (]) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :::Non-notable people? You must be joking. Erika De Wet ''literally'' wrote the book on Chapter VII resolutions. The book, unsurprisingly, is ''The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council''. As for the ICJ, it did make one ruling asserting that - rather unsurprisingly, there was dissent from justices on that Court, and customary international law has ignored that empty assertion. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:35, 14 April 2008
Long discussion of whether resolution is binding or not
I fail to see why we need to put in individual opinions from non-notable people into this article as to whether this resolution is binding or not. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- we don't. it's enough to say that it's non binding. it's not under chapter 7. not complicated. Amoruso (talk) 01:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Non-notable people? You must be joking. Erika De Wet literally wrote the book on Chapter VII resolutions. The book, unsurprisingly, is The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council. As for the ICJ, it did make one ruling asserting that - rather unsurprisingly, there was dissent from justices on that Court, and customary international law has ignored that empty assertion. Jayjg 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)