From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   BTR1701  wrote:   
   >Jan 7, 2026 at 4:23:37 PM PST, Adam H. Kerman  wrote:   
      
   >>Michael Kelly, professor with several sub specialties in international   
   >>law, explained what was wrong with Maduro's capture in terms of   
   >>international law. He was a guest on C-SPAN Washington Journal 1/7/2026.   
      
   >>First, Trump was blowing up boats, claiming narco-terroris. That was   
   >>war, not law enforcement. No evidence was preserved. No one was captured   
   >>to be put on trial.   
      
   >>If there's a war, then Maduro was a legitimate military target as he   
   >>gives orders to the military.   
      
   >>But... if Trump kills him in an act of war, then that means Trump   
   >>recognized him as legitimate head of state.   
      
   >Why? We kill a lot of enemy citizens during wars. Doesn't mean we believe   
   >they're all heads of state.   
      
   >>Capturing him and putting him on trial is a violation of international   
   >>law.   
      
   >Isn't that what they did with the Nazis at Nuremberg?   
      
   He's saying specifically that a head of state is immune from prosecution   
   by a foreign government. Killing him as an act of war is not a violatiom   
   of international law. Putting him on trial is.   
      
   It makes no sense.   
      
   I've never studied what law Nazis were charged under.   
      
   >>But now he gets American justice and might be acquitted!   
      
   >>In other words, fair trial is a violation of international law. The   
   >>professor implied that killing him as an act of war would not have   
   >>violated international law.   
      
   >>Frank, I have a sick headache.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)