Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Nilsen on June 23, 2004, 01:42:07 PM
-
U.S. drops resolution seeking war crimes exemption
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/23/us.war.crimes.court.ap/index.html
Its a step i know alot of you wont like, but it is a good thing. Nobody should be allowed to be above international laws. :)
-
if we are a signator to an international law then we should abide by it.. that is why it is so important for us to not sign on to international government and courts.
lazs
-
well....its getting signed.
-
It's not about being 'above the law'. And the reasons we did not sign have been explained many, many, many times.
-
absolutely lasz. The rest of the world wants us by the balls.
Europe and Asia would love to see us fail.
-
If this means that signing the Agreement will reduce our involvment in world peace keeping then WOOhoo where do we sign!!!
IKON
-
The US will certainly recognize any legitimate claims of war crimes while at the same time resisting any illegitimate claims. We'll probably reserve for ourselves the right to judge the merits of the claims as well.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Europe and Asia would love to see us fail.
getting abit paranoid are we? :p
-
Originally posted by Yeager
absolutely lasz. The rest of the world wants us by the balls.
Europe and Asia would love to see us fail.
I think I agree with you about Europe and Asia would love to see us fail, also include Russia would love to see us fail.
-
nope nielsen... pretty simple really... we will by into fair and logical laws that govern all men if we feel they are just but...
sorry to tell you... we will not buy into the whole international law and court thing or any socialist one world view.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
nope nielsen... pretty simple really... we will by into fair and logical laws that govern all men if we feel they are just but...
sorry to tell you... we will not buy into the whole international law and court thing or any socialist one world view.
lazs
So, you will "help" the world your way, but if you have to follow international laws you wont/cant cause you know you will break them?
makes sense.
-
I don't see the issue....don't do "war crimes" and there's no problem is there..
I think it's a quite admirable thing the US dropped this resolution, rather than threaten or cajole the UN-SC like a petulant child
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
I don't see the issue....don't do "war crimes" and there's no problem is there..
Tronsky
Torn,
Was it a 'War Crime' when US forces killed over 600 Somalia's in Mogadishu?
-
Originally posted by Otto
Torn,
Was it a 'War Crime' when US forces killed over 600 Somalia's in Mogadishu?
No, why would have it been?
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by lazs2
if we are a signator to an international law then we should abide by it.. that is why it is so important for us to not sign on to international government and courts.
lazs
and that would in turn weaken US position in telling other countries that they're bad.
How could you say some foreign country is being bad when they torture people, if US does the same?
or how could you say some war doesnt have basis, when US does the same?
US credibility is on the stake here.
If they aren't part of international treaties/laws, then they will have a harder time to make wars, without having a bad impact in imago.
Also it would in turn be like USSR in the eyes of other world.
...and I guess you remember how unwanted the commies were? ;)
-
This resolution is meaningless. The US is not a signatory to the permanent international war crimes court treaty and so aren't subject to it anyway. The resolution would have just reaffirmed this.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
US credibility is on the stake here.
what credibility?:confused:
-
what credibility?
hehehe:rofl
-
heeeeeeeey, keep this one civil please. It was a compliment to the US.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
So, you will "help" the world your way, but if you have to follow international laws you wont/cant cause you know you will break them?
Hey Nielsen, USA Über alles? sure lol
What have u expected, that they dont sign it ? :)
-
Well, i always thought America could use its military abroad without breaking international laws.
Some on this board seem to think that if they have to follow them then their hands are tied and they cant do anything any more. I find that very strange.
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
No, why would have it been?
Tronsky
I agree, but it would only take one nation to bring charges for that action as a 'War Crime' and the U.S. would have to defend it's self in front of a panel of Judges possibility from Syria, Sudan, Cuba and North Korea. The out come would be obvious....
-
No matter if we don't break international laws, our military would be said to have done it any way, even if we haven't. That’s way we don't what to sign.
-
Then they would be taken to court like everyone else who has signed and that court is made up of judges, not fundamentalists. If no proof was found then nothing would happen. If you have nothing to hide then there is nothing to be scared off is it?
-
Originally posted by Otto
I agree, but it would only take one nation to bring charges for that action as a 'War Crime' and the U.S. would have to defend it's self in front of a panel of Judges possibility from Syria, Sudan, Cuba and North Korea. The out come would be obvious....
International court judges do not represent single states, but are elected from regional groups and are judges of high repute. More so, none of those countries are states parties to the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court.
Originally posted by Nilsen
Then they would be taken to court like everyone else who has signed and that court is made up of judges, not fundamentalists. If no proof was found then nothing would happen. If you have nothing to hide then there is nothing to be scared off is it?
I would think if the US would want to defend itself if credible charges were layed.
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
what credibility?:confused:
We have no need for credibility with regards to alot of people. Who needs to have credibility with people like our enemies?
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
International court judges do not represent single states, but are elected from regional groups and are judges of high repute. More so, none of those countries are states parties to the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court.
Tronsky
You know more about International Law than I do. But, I agree with most. If we just stop the 'Peace Keeping' adventures it shouldn't be a problem.
Unless of course we have to 'Nuke' somebody. Then we'd probablity get a Ticket.