When it e.g. comes to war crimes, there are often international signed treaties "quoted", e.g. how soldiers may not shoot at parachutists and the like, but the sad fact is that most is
not forbidden - it just appears "inhuman", so it must be forbidden, right ? It just isn't.
So treaties may be signed or not, when it comes to teeth and claws good will and treaties are soon being sorted out. The only problem is to sell one's actions to the "public", to upkeep the facade; but usually a good propaganda department antagonizing the enemy as the beast helps to justify all kinds of own atrocities. It was necessary for protecting you .. blah ..
But this is not what the articles are about - here the underlaying structures enforce their political will, without asking the - in the minds of this self-declared "elite" - elected puppets changing every 4 or so years due to elections. Following a swaying dumb public and elections, no lasting strategy can be achieved, so they act without official rubber-stamp. If no one knows about it, there will be no prosecutor.
The question is whether this still would be a democracy ? I doubt it.
From secret killer commandoes to drones, to medical tests on prisoners to absolute surveillance this is neither freedom for anyone, nor democracy.
