Wait… the US is currently indiscriminately bombing civilians who have nowhere to go, while denying them access to basic necessities?
This just reminded me Kissinger is dead, my sincere gratitude for that
Gotta plan the road trip to piss on his grave.
Maybe not actively but there’s a lot of past presidents that should be charged if the world was fair. Most obvious example is Bush.
Jr or Sr?
Yes
First one then the other
How about Reagon / Carter? El Salvadore Death Squads? School of the Americas?
Oh 100% they should be too, I just went with the easiest recent one.
Only by proxy, so no blood on their hands. It’s a psychopathological reasoning, but here we are
The US is not a signatory to the ICC, is it?
In fact, I believe the planned response to such an arrest is to actually storm the Hague and retrieve the American.
Point is, I don’t think the US government is too worried about it.
They are worried about their holidays in the countries who apply ICC juridiction (a lot of good holidays places…). Can you imagine ? The audacity of ruining my holidays because i did (or supported by providing weapons, veto, etc) a little genocide ! Poor me, bad ICC.
neither is israel… the ICC decided that it has jurisdiction if a crime was committed in a country(area? because palestine is a signatory but not a country) that is a signatory
so it’s charged israelis because palestine is a signatory
afghanistan is also a signatory, so AFAIK the ICC believes it has jurisdiction to charge US citizens for any war crimes that may have occurred during… that… whole… thing
the US disagrees of course, but IDK it kinda makes sense. if you assasinate someone in, say, the UK and then flee to… like… Russia for example <_< then the UK isn’t just going to say well i guess they’re Russian so we don’t have jurisdiction
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/ChZZ3GKiNE0
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Ya know what, I think I am ok with punishing people leading war crime efforts. I sure do wonder what the party of “tough on crime” thinks about the on going genocide?
They’re coveres by one of the commandments of their lord and saviour:
“Rules for thee, but not for me” — Supply Side Jesus
I wonder what mister crime bill, lock the S.O.B up, thinks of it… Oh wait I don’t have to wonder he just told us!
In 1989 […] Mr. Biden lamented that the Republican president, George H. W. Bush, was not doing enough to put “violent thugs” in prison. In 1993, he warned of “predators on our streets.” And in a 1994 Senate floor speech, he likened himself to another Republican president: “Every time Richard Nixon, when he was running in 1972, would say, ‘Law and order,’ the Democratic match or response was, ‘Law and order with justice’ — whatever that meant. And I would say, ‘Lock the S.O.B.s up.’”
I really hope we eventually get to a government that unanimously agrees that all life has value.
They do, it’s a monetary value. 200,000 dead Palestinians = Lockheed Martin line go up.
As seen on TV, until used on the press.
9 out of 10 fascists choose Lockheed Martin to cleanse their regions of targeted scapegoats and the media.
The ICC is 100% correct.
So basically the US government is a gigantic Trump - rising up in self-righteous fury at the very idea that anyone might dare to charge them for the crimes they’ve brazenly committed.
but but biden is trying so hard to save the palestinians!1!!
Yes but bad man is worse so it’s all ok, nothing to see here
What’s your 3rd option again? That’s right you don’t have one.
This is so fucking dumb. I don’t care, it doesn’t make what Biden is doing any better. This is not the voting booth
There would be a lot of war crimes the USA can be charged for, retroactively. I think this is not just about Israel.
Not would. Remember when the ICC tried to investigate US war crimes in Afghanistan?
Yes. If it wasn’t so horrific, it would be comical.
Yes
Well to be fair, our government has done some war crimes. Maybe we should hear the ICC out on this one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act
Because your government has laws that would shield its citizens from ICC persecutions. Because you know, your government feels above international humanitarian law.
When those arrest warrants are against your rivals (Putin) it is all fine and commendable, but when it is against you and your allies it is a despicable act. You see the double standards here?
War crimes are war crimes no matter the side that commits them. And trying to undermine international laws and institutions created with the whole idea to prevent humanity from making the same mistakes like in the past should be preserved and protected.
Yes but also no. The U.S. isn’t a party to the ICC. It’s not under ICC jurisdiction regardless of the ASMPA. The function of the ASMPA is mostly to serve as political theater.
The U.S. should be a party to the ICC, but it’s not and it likely never will be.
Maybe you should STOP AIDING THEM IN COMMITTING WAR CRIMES THEN???
They don’t mean in terms of aid.
The US has refused to submit themselves or their soldiers to international criminal law for a long time now, for plenty of other reasons.
“Oh nooooo…anyway…”
Ok, can we take the CIA to court? There are a couple of executives in old folks homes that arguably deserve to be rolled into an active volcano.
The US government cares about international law now? That’s a new one.
