Jump to content









  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 64

      S/E Asian Thai Consulates going to eVisa online system effective Tuesday Oct 8th

    2. 329

      And so the exodus of quality expats begins. This time it's personal

    3. 49

      Trump's Claim of Gaza Visit Draws Scrutiny Amid Factual Discrepancies

    4. 49

      Trump's Claim of Gaza Visit Draws Scrutiny Amid Factual Discrepancies

    5. 70

      Words sentences that are offensive

    6. 1,056

      Its Happening - Law to Tax Overseas Income Now in Progress

    7. 24

      Sending food back to the kitchen?

    8. 8

      Harris mingled with Tehran regime operative who promotes terrorism

    9. 34

      Oh Beloved Bangkok, How So You Have Changed...

    10. 66

      DeSantis Pushes Back on Climate Change’s Role in Stronger Storms

    11. 273

      Why is the MAGA movement so susceptible to crazy conspiracy theories?

    12. 66

      DeSantis Pushes Back on Climate Change’s Role in Stronger Storms

    13. 8

      Harris mingled with Tehran regime operative who promotes terrorism

    14. 273

      Why is the MAGA movement so susceptible to crazy conspiracy theories?

Trump administration to take tough stance against International Criminal Court


webfact

Recommended Posts


42 minutes ago, Becker said:

Trump administration to take tough stance against International Criminal Court

 

 

The man-child is probably afraid he will be prosecuted by the court in the future.

 

 

One needs to commit big crimes to be prosecuted..... Oh my God! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 investigation into alleged war crimes  

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

It's disappointing the US cannot find a legal path to permit the function of the ICC applying to US citizens. However, Trump and Bolton's OTT aggressive response is shameful. For those interestested, a link below of the matters at issue between the ICC and the USA which surely can be resolved by negotiation.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court#Incompatibility_with_the_U.S._Constitution

Trump has already negotiated with two words '<deleted> off''

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Without collaboration from nation states it makes the work of the ICC extremely difficult. Have a read of the ICC mandate below, then explain why and you too Boon Mee, believe the US completely reject the ICC investigations into whether War Crimes were committed by US military or not. I do understand  US cooperation would require an amendment to the US Constitution. However, would it not be better for the US be open to, rather than blocking War Crimes investigations into its citizens. Under Trump the US is pushing very hard to undermine the international Rule of Law and other institutions. IMO, in the longer term, the Trump Administration deliberately destroying domestic and international Institutions will not be of net benefit to the US. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court

 

The US, being the prime super-power, is militarily (and otherwise) involved in numerous conflicts and hot-spots. The "even-handed" and "informed" manner in which even the enlightened membership of this forum often reacts to related issues, may give a clue as to the value of to reasons to refrain.

 

The ICC is a nice idea, with a problematic application.

 

I agree with comments made regarding the Trump administration manner of addressing the issue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Simple.. don't pay for them.

 

Anyway American's supporting this action  of Thrump are condemning war crimes, because that is what this is about. Soldiers committing ar crimes.. why protect scum like that ?

 

Who gets to decide if war crimes were committed? Who's got the authority to apply punishments? Do all countries subscribe to this? Do all get treated in the same manner?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an American- both Trump and Bolton are way out of bounds on this issue. Sanctioning judges- freezing monies is an absurd reaction.

 

However, as a sovereign country- I would never surrender jurisdiction of my countrymen to an International Court. However, I would co-operate with the court if they wanted to investigate a 'crime such as genocide such as what is happening in Burma.  

 

If the court wants to investigate the actions of individual soldiers in Afghanistan- I would not co-operate. If there is evidence, it needs to be turned over to the United States as  US Military must adhere to the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.  If the International Court has evidence of a policy of genocide carried out by US Military under orders of the US Government- present your evidence to the World and let public opinion dictate action.  I might add that all US military officers take extensive training in the rule of War  and I know no officer that would engage in killing of civilians. They simply wouldn't follow the order if given.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One point I'd note here just in general, and not specific to the U.S.

 

Civilians and innocents do get injured and killed in war and conflict zones. That is inevitable. But there are different ways that can happen.

 

1. By sheer unavoidable accident

2. By neglect or incompetence

3. By deliberate, intentional action (genocide, human shields, crimes against civilians like rape, etc etc.)

 

If the ICC is going to play a role in the world, IMHO, it ought to be focusing first on crimes against humanity or innocents/civilians where those occurred by deliberate action.

 

I think the cases of #3 by the U.S. military in conflicts abroad are relatively rare, but where they occur, they certainly should be prosecuted, and I'd believe normally would be by the U.S. justice system.

 

However, there are other countries and forces where the #3 mode is their norm and where there is little or no internal enforcement of laws and legal norms against their forces, or they're actually following the policy of their government/leaders. Myanmar's ethnic cleansing, Duterte's drug war, the terrorist groups and others come to mind.

 

Personally, I wouldn't put those latter kinds of crimes in the same basket as a U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan where the U.S. is seeking to take out some terrorists and ends up, despite precautions, inadvertently killing civilians as collateral damage.

 

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...