If Charles Adams claimed that the US civil war was an internal insurrection, and outside the remit of ?

International law, what right did the US have to intervene in the Yugoslavian civil war, or the current civil war in Iraq?|||There are a number of "Charles Adams" One was a Confederate general, another a Union general, one argued for succession and another wrote that the Civil War was about tariffs.





Generally anybody can pick and chose facts to support a preconceived agenda. I've had it argued that the Civil War was a "conservative revolt" to preserve a dying way of life.





Following Korea, communist movements shifted to "civil wars" and "wars of liberation." They discovered in Korea that open invasion would be met with force.Most later actions could be broadly labeled "civil war"





In the Yugoslavian conflict the term "ethnic cleansing" reached the public. Would you term that a civil war? Would fighting between religious groups be a civil war or a crusade or a jihad? The there was the policy of rape as an instrument of oppression.





At what point does a person say "It's not my business" and let an injustice happen? Does it matter what a label is?





Put it this way. If someone is beating you up, should I call the police or just walk away?|||The U.S. Civil War was purely an internal insurrection, but the current civil strife in Iraq is the result of a foreign invasion. That's one big difference. Beware of cheap historical analogies that don't stand up to intelligent scrutiny.