Sentences with phrase «using military force against»

However article 9 of the Japanese constitution prohibits Japan from using military force against another state for any reason, except in self defence.

Kim also reaffirmed that he would not use military force against the South and raised the need for an institutional mechanism to prevent unintended escalations, Yoon said.

What Clark actually said in reference to «a» Resolution on 10/09/02: http://premium1.fosters.com/2002/election%5F2002/oct/09/us%5F2cong%5F1009a.asp «Retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Wednesday he supports A congressional resolution that would give President Bush authority to use military force against Iraq, although he has reservations about the country's move toward war.

The criticism has grown louder amid the debate over whether Washington should use military force against the Syrian regime, with some lawmakers withholding support until the administration committed to providing the rebels with more assistance.

Not exact matches

It is, at least, apparent that the debates about humanitarian intervention by military force in the last decade, about the creation of international criminal tribunals in a number of cases, about the idea of a state's «universal jurisdiction» in cases of violations of the Genocide Convention or other «crimes against humanity,» about how far the global war on terror may proceed without violating the rights of states, and most recently, about the United - States - led use of force against the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq, have all raised important points of positive and customary international law, and that in every one of these cases the outcome remains unsettled.

And Roach's references to the Middle East carry the message that he assumed that the use of force against Saddam Hussein's military would produce a regional conflagration.

The purpose of our Armed Forces is not about building churches and stomping around according to their manipulative and subversive machinations behind the scenes using simple mind - control techniques against our own military's usage of mind - control in training.

But lately the idiots have used the military force to force other one as our democracy, it is such the idiot to against the people's will!

The American military strike against Syria threatened Russian - American relations as the Kremlin denounced President Donald Trump's use of force and the Russian military indicated it would suspend an agreement to share information about air operations over the country that was devised to avoid accidental conflict.

Within the USA, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists is so broad as to be a rubber - stamp for any action by the president.

When the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was challenged in court, it was determined to be legal.

An «enemy» in the context of the phrase «enemy combatant» is a term of art that refers to a group defined by Congress with whom the United States is at war or against whom it is authorized to use military force.

The Iraq Resolution known as «AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002» cites national policy, a war on «terrorism», and United Nations Security Council Resolutions to justify authorization of military force against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, ClaMILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002» cites national policy, a war on «terrorism», and United Nations Security Council Resolutions to justify authorization of military force against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, ClauseFORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002» cites national policy, a war on «terrorism», and United Nations Security Council Resolutions to justify authorization of military force against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, ClauAGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002» cites national policy, a war on «terrorism», and United Nations Security Council Resolutions to justify authorization of military force against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clamilitary force against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clauseforce against Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clauagainst Iraq, but I am not aware of any document by which the United States has been legally bound by a declaration of war against Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clauagainst Iraq as per the federal Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11).

Also under the War on Terror, there is an Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists that can be issued.

That this House notes that ISIL poses a direct threat to the United Kingdom; welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2249 which determines that ISIL constitutes an «unprecedented threat to international peace and security» and calls on states to take «all necessary measures» to prevent terrorist acts by ISIL and to «eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria»; further notes the clear legal basis to defend the UK and our allies in accordance with the UN Charter; notes that military action against ISIL is only one component of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria; welcomes the renewed impetus behind the Vienna talks on a ceasefire and political settlement; welcomes the Government's continuing commitment to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees; underlines the importance of planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction in Syria; welcomes the Government's continued determination to cut ISIL's sources of finance, fighters and weapons; notes the requests from France, the US and regional allies for UK military assistance; acknowledges the importance of seeking to avoid civilian casualties, using the UK's particular capabilities; notes the Government will not deploy UK troops in ground combat operations; welcomes the Government's commitment to provide quarterly progress reports to the House; and accordingly supports Her Majesty's Government in taking military action, specifically airstrikes, exclusively against ISIL in Syria; and offers its wholehearted support to Her Majesty's Armed Forces.

Any hypothetical military engagement where a nuclear armed country were to be in danger of being completely overrun would change the calculation on whether they would be willing to use nuclear weapons, but Russia probably would not, for example, use their nuclear weapons as a deterrent against attacks against their conventional troops in Ukraine, even if they were in danger of being forced out of Ukraine completely because the retaliation would cost much more to them than what they would be losing.

Why it matters: President Buhari is scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House on April 30, and both men would likely discuss further U.S. military assistance to Nigeria against the backdrop of serious human rights violations by security forces who use the same weapons to kill civilians.

The MoD is still taking stock of the surprise decision of the House of Commons last summer to reject military intervention to punish President Assad of Syria for the use of chemical weapons against rebel forces.

It is not clear whether Menendez will step down from his role as ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, or how a Menendez-less committee would change the Senate's response to the Iran negotiations or a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force against ISIS.

He does not have an authorization for the use of military force against Syria by congress.»

«That this house notes that ISIL poses a direct threat to the United Kingdom; welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2249 which determines that ISIL constitutes an «unprecedented threat to international peace and security» and calls on states to take «all necessary measures» to prevent terrorist acts by ISIL and to «eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria»; further notes the clear legal basis to defend the UK and our allies in accordance with the UN Charter; notes that military action against ISIL is only one component of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria; welcomes the renewed impetus behind the Vienna talks on a ceasefire and political settlement; welcomes the Government's continuing commitment to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees; underlines the importance of planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction in Syria; welcomes the Government's continued determination to cut ISIL's sources of finance, fighters, and weapons; notes the requests from France, the US and regional allies for UK military assistance; acknowledges the importance of seeking to avoid civilian causalities; using the UK's particular capabilities; notes the Government's will not deploy UK troops in ground combat operations; welcomes the Government's commitment to provide quarterly progress reports to the House; and accordingly supports Her Majesty's Government in taking military action, specifically airstrikes, exclusively against ISIL in Syria; and offers its wholehearted support to Her Majesty's Armed Forces.»

No one is jumping up and down demanding the use of military force against Egypt, or Rwanda, or Sudan, or any other country.

Kaine was also pressed on a major split on the Democratic ticket: While both Clinton and Kaine have urged Congress to approve a new authorization of the use of military force against ISIS, Clinton has said it's not legally necessary, while Kaine has asserted it is.

Rabin and Peres banter back and forth about the merits of military action against the terrorists, the former trying to get others to understand why he's resistant to use force while the latter plots with quietly intense Machiavellian precision in hopes of changing his mind.

He was no strict party - line guy either, breaking with his Democratic colleagues on two high - profile issues: He voted against authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, against reauthorizing the Patriot Act and favored allowing oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, framing it as a matter of indigenous people's rights.