Well kwa maelezo na argument wanazotumia wanasheria wakimataifa ni kwamba hiyo aggression charter ya UN ilipitishwa rasmi soon after the Iraq invasion. Na imekuwa implemented rasmi 2010.
Kwa hivyo wanadai prior actions are not subjected to scrutinising and in this instance ilianza vita kabla ya aggression charter.
Kitu kingine muhimu ni kwamba haya mataifa makubwa hakuna watu wanaoweza kwenda kuwachunguza rasmi na hata hizi ripoti zao za kujifanyia tathmini waandishi husika ni wataalamu wa kujilinda ndio maana despite the 'Chilcot report' providing all the evidence that the war was not justified mwisho wa siku conclusion yake ni kwamba the rationale to invade (concerns raised over Iraq at the time) were enough of a reason on their own merit to go into war.
Hitimisho la namna hiyo lina nullify all other mistakes maana kwa UK ata kama Tony Blair aendi ICC kuna wanasheria tayari wanaangalia jinsi ya kuishitaki serikari kwa kupoteza maisha ya watu 150 unnecessary in addition to the disabilities they have caused to thousands of soldiers both psychological impairment and physical losses. Kwa hivyo hitimisho la ripoti kama hizi lazima lilinde hizi angle kisheria pamoja na kutoonekana wavunjaji wa UN agreements.
Sijui USA utaratibu wao hila kwa UK you know what they are driving at, in this instance kuna watu wanataka serikari ikubali ku sign hiyo UN anti-aggression agreement and eventually itakuwa sheria UK ili waweze kuwaweka watu accountable japo kwao. Kama kuna kitu waingereza awapendi ni mtu kutumia madaraka vibaya au kufanya maamuzi kwa kushirikisha watu wachace and in the eyes of their democracy Tony Blair is the case study they wish not see in the future leaders.
