The United States is psychotic.

US: "Putin is a war criminal. Send him to the Hague to face the ICC!!! AGGGRRRHHH.
Global citizens: "George W Bush and Netanyahu are war criminals. Send them to the Hague to face the ICC!!!"
US: "AGGGRRRHHH. Destroy the ICC!!! Rip them apart. Kill them all!!!"

"It's ironic that America has shouldered the overwhelming burden of protecting the West and global stability for decades, only for this unelected, ideologically driven body(ICC) to appease & enable terrorist & presume authority over American actions".

Example:The ICC has never tried or convicted any Iranian officials, military commanders, or leaders of Iran’s terror proxy networks.

Edited July 15Jul 15 by riclag

17 minutes ago, riclag said:

Many European allies, for instance, turned a blind eye or offered minimal support when the U.S. sought help defending shared interests against jihadist threats and instability in the Middle East.

Don't you see the writings on the wall? Obviously not, so just wait and see how this will work out for the US

11 minutes ago, connda said:

The United States is psychotic.

US: "Putin is a war criminal. Send him to the Hague to face the ICC!!! AGGGRRRHHH.
Global citizens: "George W Bush and Netanyahu are war criminals. Send them to the Hague to face the ICC!!!"
US: "AGGGRRRHHH. Destroy the ICC!!! Rip them apart. Kill them all!!!"

From an AI search on when the US were advocates of sending people to the ICC.

"The United States has had a complicated, often skeptical relationship with the International Criminal Court (ICC), which it has never joined.It signed the Rome Statute under President Clinton in 2000 but did not ratify it, and later "unsigned" it under Bush while passing laws like the American Service-Members' Protection Act to limit cooperation and protect U.S. personnel.

Despite this, there have been notable instances—primarily under the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations—where the U.S. supported or facilitated referrals of situations involving alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide to the ICC via the UN Security Council (the main mechanism for non-member states). These were pragmatic, case-by-case decisions tied to specific crises rather than broad endorsement of the Court.

Darfur, Sudan (2005)

• In March 2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1593, referring the situation in Darfur (where Sudanese government forces and militias were accused of widespread atrocities, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity) to the ICC prosecutor.

• The U.S. abstainedon the vote (which passed 11-0-4) rather than vetoing it. This was a significant shift during Bush's second term toward pragmatic engagement, allowing the ICC to investigate despite U.S. objections to the Court's jurisdiction over non-parties.

• The referral enabled ICC probes leading to arrest warrants for figures like Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. The U.S. had previously pushed for accountability in Darfur through other means (e.g., sanctions).

Libya (2011)

• In February 2011, amid Muammar Gaddafi's violent crackdown on protesters (involving alleged crimes against humanity), the UN Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1970, referring the Libya situation since mid-February 2011 to the ICC.

• The U.S. voted in favor alongside all other Council members. This was under the Obama administration, which took a more cooperative stance toward the ICC on a case-by-case basis where it aligned with U.S. interests (e.g., supporting the Arab Spring uprisings and civilian protection).

• The referral led to ICC investigations and warrants related to the Gaddafi regime.

Broader Context and Other Support

• Clinton era groundwork: The U.S. was actively involved in negotiating the Rome Statute and strongly supported ad hoc tribunals like the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and for Rwanda (ICTR), which prosecuted war criminals. Clinton signed the Rome Statute to signal support for accountability but cited concerns (e.g., over jurisdiction and complementarity) that prevented ratification.

• Later examples of cooperation include U.S. assistance in transferring ICC suspects (e.g., from Congo or Uganda) and, in some cases, rhetorical or limited support for ICC efforts on issues like Russian actions in Ukraine (under Biden), though these often stopped short of formal advocacy for new referrals.

• These instances were selective: The U.S. supported referrals when they targeted adversaries or aligned with humanitarian/security goals but consistently opposed ICC scrutiny of itself, allies (e.g., Israel), or situations risking U.S. personnel.

In summary, U.S. "advocacy" for sending individuals or situations to the ICC has been limited, pragmatic, and tied to UNSC referrals in Darfur and Libya—not a general policy. Positions have fluctuated by administration, with hostility under Bush (early) and Trump, and more engagement under Obama and Biden in specific contexts. For the most current details, official UN or State Department records are the best sources."

I.e., the US has a psychotic approach to the ICC.

1 minute ago, riclag said:

Example:The ICC has never tried or convicted any Iranian officials, military commanders, or leaders of Iran’s proxy networks.

Has Iran ever signed up for the agreement?

This sovereignty argument reminds me how far left the international left has gone with the argument of the ICC has become.

Administrations since 2002 have not recognized the ICC .

While the international & domestic left has not recognized the enforcement of past administrations efforts in stopping Illegal immigration since the bipartisan Homeland Security Act was implemented in to Law.

On 7/15/2026 at 8:56 AM, JonnyF said:

Let's hope Trump is successful and gets rid of it.

He'll be doing the world another massive favour.

He needs to get on with it, he’ll be a lame duck after the mid terms.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He needs to get on with it, he’ll be a lame duck after the mid terms.

At least he'll still have a mandate, unlike Burnham.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

At least he'll still have a mandate, unlike Burnham.

Burnham has the same mandate as every British PM.

He won the election of his constituency.

ICC & leftist playbook, Jack Smith a former prosecutor for the Hague affiliated ICC ,ties in the corruption of unelected officials is caught lying during testimony . Jack Smith’s domestic tactics perfectly mirror the unchecked power of the globalist ICC, where unelected bureaucrats operate entirely outside constitutional boundaries.

By bypassing legal filters to spy on sitting U.S. Senators and subsequently lying to Congress about it, Smith demonstrated the same contempt for sovereign checks and balances that defines international tribunals.

Ultimately, both the ICC and Smith’s illegitimate appointment show what happens when partisan actors are given unchecked power to target political opponents without voter accountability.

Thank god Florida's federal judge sniffed out the Dem's unconstitutional overreach.

10 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He needs to get on with it, he’ll be a lame duck after the mid terms.

spoken like a trump hating non american from thousands of miles away

42 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

spoken like a trump hating non american from thousands of miles away

The international leftist are counting their eggs before they hatch again.

Three things are certain their style of far left are taking over the Dem party,Communism, Marxism and radical socialism.

Trump has a couple of more years of performative EO to introduce in America First.

And the far left Dem's are leaderless

https://amgreatness.com/2026/07/17/secretary-rubios-campaign-to-dismantle-the-icc-defending-american-sovereignty-at-last/

thank god. give them a choice, us or them

18 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

https://amgreatness.com/2026/07/17/secretary-rubios-campaign-to-dismantle-the-icc-defending-american-sovereignty-at-last/

thank god. give them a choice, us or them

Mamdani trying his hand at being a stooge for the international unrecognized court of un elected bureaucrats. Kinda like to see him try it. It could potentially be the end of his role as mayor.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mamdani-says-nyc-exploring-whether-arrest-netanyahu-israeli-leader-visits-un-general-assembly

2 minutes ago, riclag said:

Mamdani trying his hand at being a stooge for the international unrecognized court of un elected bureaucrats. Kinda like to see him try it. It could potentially be the end of his role as mayor.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mamdani-says-nyc-exploring-whether-arrest-netanyahu-israeli-leader-visits-un-general-assembly

o hes just doing that to show his bonafides to his moronic supporters and murderous cadre. cant be a good socialist or democrat without preparing for the next auschwitz

Attention ICC! Mop the floors and oil the cell door locks. Possible client arriving in September.

2 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Attention ICC! Mop the floors and oil the cell door locks. Possible client arriving in September

the fact that you think there is even an infinitesimal chance of that is telling, both in terms of your foul, anti human philosophy and your utter ignorance of us law

but the fact that confirmed virulent murderous anti semitic euros support the court is enough for me to support its destruction