



By Ben Cohen

(Cross posted in the Huffington Post)

Nobody seems to have noticed that Hillary Clinton has broken international law by threatening Iran with 'obliteration.'

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said in an interview with ABC. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

ADVERTISEMENT Thanks for watching! Visit Website

Why are alarm bells not ringing?

In chapter I, article II of the United Nations Charter, it states:

All Members shall refrain in their international relations

from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or

political independence of any state, or in any other manner

inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

The U.N Charter was signed in San Francisco in 1945 by the United

States along with 50 other countries. Each country is bound by its

articles, and the treaty prevails over all other treaties (including

'special' relationships with other nations). In other words, regardless

of any hypothetical attack on Israel, the United States is legally

bound not to threaten Iran or any other country. This is also enshrined in the constitution. Article IV Clause II states:

ADVERTISEMENT Thanks for watching! Visit Website

ADVERTISEMENT Thanks for watching! Visit Website

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which

shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which

shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the

supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound

thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the

contrary notwithstanding.

It is incredible that public debate regarding Hillary Clinton's

threat to annihilate Iran centers around campaign strategy rather than

international law. I have been scouring the mainstream media to find

anything criticizing Clinton's remarks for their illegality, but can

find nothing other than comments like 'Clinton's tough talk on Iran'

(taken from ABC News)

While most Democrats have kept quiet, Obama rightly denounced

Clinton's remarks saying, "It's not the language we need right now, and

I think it's language reflective of George Bush."

Obama is right of course (although he had his own moment with Pakistan), but still falling a few thousand miles short of calling it what it is.

"That is not a word gaffe," writes Robert Scheer. "It is an assertion of the right of our nation to commit genocide on an unprecedented scale."

Attacking Obama while pulling the entire Democratic Party down with

her is one thing, but threatening to commit nuclear holocaust on

another country is another matter all together. These outrageous

remarks should not only be denounced, but punished appropriately by her

party. If an Iranian public figure had stated the intention to launch a

nuclear war on America, the United States would demand international

condemnation or possibly launch another preemptive war.

Such reckless comments should not be tolerated by the Democratic

Party, and if it took itself seriously, Clinton would no longer be a

part of it.

Luckily for her, they don't.