Önmagában a wikipedia egy blog. Nem attól nem lesz egy információ hiteles/hiteltelen, hogy hol jelenik meg. Hanem, hogy alátámasztja-e az ott megjelent információt más hiteles dokumentum is. De olyan ez mint amikor a vitapartner karakterét kezdi ki valaki a tények helyett amiket felhoz.
The NATO bombing is a "use of force against the territorial integrity" of Yugoslavia, if not against its "political independence," and therefore a violation of the U.N. Charter.
Pursuant to Chapter Seven of the U.N. Charter, the Security Council is given the authority to act in order to preserve
peace and safety of the international community. The Security
Council, although it has repeatedly addressed the Kosovo issue,
did not specifically authorize the use of force against Yugoslavia. The United States and NATO have maintained that the
resolution is implicitly authorized by Security Council resolutions 1160,11 1199,12 and 1203,13 and that only the certainty of a Russian and/or Chinese veto stood in the way of a Security Council resolution explicitly authorizing action against Yugoslavia. Security Council Resolution 1199, in particular, determined that the situation in Kosovo is "a threat to peace and security in the region." 14 Prior to the bombings, NATO Secretary-General Solana referred to and repeated this phrase in a statement concluding "that the Allies believe that in ... respect to the present crisis in Kosovo as described in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1199, there are legitimate grounds for the Alliance to threaten, and if necessary, to use force." 15 Despite the assertions of the NATO members, however, the likelihood of a veto of any explicit authorization by not one but two of the permanent members makes it clear that NATO's action is not authorized by the Security Council. 16 The Security Council was never intended to decide matters upon a "one country, one vote" principle, and the veto power given to the five permanent members exists for good reason. In order for NATO's action to be legal, it must either be self-defense under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter or be permitted by some rule of customary international law not in conflict with the NATO states' obligations under Article 2(4).
https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir…
Tessék ez egy fokkal komolyabb munka. Explicit felhatalmazást soha sem kapott a Nato az ENSZ BT-től és ezt pontosan tudja mindenki. A többi meg rizsa.