LoTM, I merely suggest that the exception you made for the South was not well founded. There are many examples of parties that are fighting for their independence where interventions have occurred, including France in case of our own revolution. So your exception concerning the South cannot be a general rule.
The real question is whether the party intervening can not only fight to achieve the survival and independence of the party they seek to help, but to destroy and occupy the other party even if it offers peace.
If the Brits had intervened on behalf of the South, occuppied the North and made it a part of its empire, I suggest to you that that would be wrong.
Saddam was willing to enter a ceasefire after his troops had been evicted from Kuwait. Had Bush continued to Baghdad, that would have been a war of aggression.
There was debate about going North of the 38th Parallel in 1950. We did, and the Chinese intervened claiming our war had transformed from a defensive struggle into a war of aggression.
Had we not just defended Bosnia or Kosovo, but destroyed and occuppied Serbia, that would have been a war of aggression as well.
But, in October 1939, the Brits declare it their intention to destroy the Nazi regime in response to a peace offer, and this is not aggression [even if it were somewhat justified by prior German betrayals]?
The real question is whether the party intervening can not only fight to achieve the survival and independence of the party they seek to help, but to destroy and occupy the other party even if it offers peace.
If the Brits had intervened on behalf of the South, occuppied the North and made it a part of its empire, I suggest to you that that would be wrong.
Saddam was willing to enter a ceasefire after his troops had been evicted from Kuwait. Had Bush continued to Baghdad, that would have been a war of aggression.
There was debate about going North of the 38th Parallel in 1950. We did, and the Chinese intervened claiming our war had transformed from a defensive struggle into a war of aggression.
Had we not just defended Bosnia or Kosovo, but destroyed and occuppied Serbia, that would have been a war of aggression as well.
But, in October 1939, the Brits declare it their intention to destroy the Nazi regime in response to a peace offer, and this is not aggression [even if it were somewhat justified by prior German betrayals]?
Comment