Thats why there was the dancing before the US invasions; getting "Security Council Resolutions" which we could then enforce as a legal agent of the UN. Those were "Legal wars".
I do not understand the skeins of justifications and circumlocutions around it; it seems very similar to "Might makes Right" with a (tall) froth of persiflage atop it to me. But there are people who hold faith with that fluff and find it a source of righteousness, and I don't say they're utterly wrong and disconnected from reality, either.
True, but the UN passed 16 resolutions against Iraq leading up to the war. That leant a lot of legitimacy to the war itself. The US coalition ended up withdrawing their resolution since it would have been vetoed, but felt like they had enough legitimacy from the UN to go ahead anyways.
And not to split hairs, but "illegal" to whom? The UN? Ok, but the major powers were the guilty ones. Who would enforce such a charge of an "illegal war"? Who had the power to actually enforce it?
I do not understand the skeins of justifications and circumlocutions around it; it seems very similar to "Might makes Right" with a (tall) froth of persiflage atop it to me. But there are people who hold faith with that fluff and find it a source of righteousness, and I don't say they're utterly wrong and disconnected from reality, either.