• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    52
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    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 ongoing genocide?

    • @WhatAmLemmy
      link
      English
      176 months ago

      They’re coveres by one of the commandments of their lord and saviour:

      “Rules for thee, but not for me” — Supply Side Jesus

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      156 months ago

      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.’”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        96 months ago

        I really hope we eventually get to a government that unanimously agrees that all life has value.

          • @MrVilliam
            link
            English
            76 months ago

            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.

  • @Feathercrown
    link
    English
    426 months ago

    Maybe you should STOP AIDING THEM IN COMMITTING WAR CRIMES THEN???

    • @kromem
      link
      English
      86 months ago

      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.

  • @Etterra
    link
    386 months ago

    Well to be fair, our government has done some war crimes. Maybe we should hear the ICC out on this one.

    • @filister
      link
      266 months ago

      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.

      • arquebus_x
        link
        fedilink
        16 months ago

        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.

  • @Rottcodd
    link
    33
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    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.

  • @kerrigan778
    link
    216 months ago

    What’s this “we” business. I haven’t committed any warcrimes but I would like anyone who commits them in my name to face justice.

  • Em Adespoton
    link
    fedilink
    176 months ago

    Wait… the US is currently indiscriminately bombing civilians who have nowhere to go, while denying them access to basic necessities?

    • @OccamsTeapot
      link
      66 months ago

      Yes but bad man is worse so it’s all ok, nothing to see here

      • @Dkarma
        link
        -26 months ago

        What’s your 3rd option again? That’s right you don’t have one.

        • @OccamsTeapot
          link
          76 months ago

          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

  • @AnUnusualRelic
    link
    146 months ago

    The US government cares about international law now? That’s a new one.

  • FartsWithAnAccent
    link
    English
    12
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    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.

    • Pup Biru
      link
      fedilink
      166 months ago

      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

    • Enoril
      link
      fedilink
      66 months ago

      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.

  • Maeve
    link
    fedilink
    126 months ago

    There would be a lot of war crimes the USA can be charged for, retroactively. I think this is not just about Israel.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness
      link
      fedilink
      86 months ago

      Not would. Remember when the ICC tried to investigate US war crimes in Afghanistan?

      • Maeve
        link
        fedilink
        46 months ago

        Yes. If it wasn’t so horrific, it would be comical.

  • arquebus_x
    link
    fedilink
    76 months ago

    Except the U.S. is not a party to the ICC and therefore not subject to its jurisdiction. It should be, but it’s not. This is bullshit fear-mongering over something that literally cannot happen, in order to distract people from the thing that will and should be happening.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      Neither is Israel. But even just the optics of the ICC ruling on Israel is good for the rest of the world to see. Honestly, same for the case of the USA. Most USA Presidents are textbook case war criminals. Only because their military operations help the USA itself geopolitically it does not make it generally ethnical. Most Americans in this perspective ate very biased. But the rest of the world sees it.

      Over 1 million Iraqis are dead because of Bush Jr. actions and their downstream, Obama ordered drone kills above any other previous President, many of those killing civilians, USA has destabilised dozens of governments over the course of the 20th century, Project Condor is a perfect example.