Jay they would be more unbiased than any trial that goes on in the United States with regards to terrorism or anything else.
International Criminal Court
- Thread starter Jersay
- Start date
RE: International Crimina
Why would the US submit to such a court? Why is it in America's interest?
Why would the US submit to such a court? Why is it in America's interest?
Whether or not it is proper to say, the United States of America is not going to submit itself to the scrutiny, nevermind judgement, of any foreign body — whatever does not serve the interests of the U.S. would not be considered an acceptable course of action, and there would likely be some sort of embargo or retaliatory effort in response to any such requests for their submission.
Because this court is an international court that tries people based on crimes. And since American hasn't signed on because (possibly crimes they have committed) they don't have to be effected yet.
However other coalition members Britain for example can be held responsible for crimes if they so committed.
And quite simply, because if you commit a war crime you deserve to suffer no matter what kind of country you are or how powerful you are.
However other coalition members Britain for example can be held responsible for crimes if they so committed.
And quite simply, because if you commit a war crime you deserve to suffer no matter what kind of country you are or how powerful you are.
I agree, Jersay.
We should endeavour to create a supreme court for world affairs; however, I think that such an authority should be limited to those brought before them in relation to crimes — the right to strike down legislation (for example, the Supreme Court of Canada has such an authority within Canada) should be prohibited.
We should endeavour to create a supreme court for world affairs; however, I think that such an authority should be limited to those brought before them in relation to crimes — the right to strike down legislation (for example, the Supreme Court of Canada has such an authority within Canada) should be prohibited.
RE: International Crimina
The Bush-Cheney administration has carried out the destruction of Iraq violating the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, the Law of Armed Conflict, and patently commisioning through the chain of command violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The entire administration are guilty of crimes of war, there will be no peace or justice in the world untill these crimes are addressed,and if the Americans in this forum want thier freedoms and a place in the world they had better wake up to the truth.
The Bush-Cheney administration has carried out the destruction of Iraq violating the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, the Law of Armed Conflict, and patently commisioning through the chain of command violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The entire administration are guilty of crimes of war, there will be no peace or justice in the world untill these crimes are addressed,and if the Americans in this forum want thier freedoms and a place in the world they had better wake up to the truth.
beaver get an assault team together and prepare to arrest Bush and his cronies next time he gets in your neck of the woods.
I will watch on television, for these injustices to be attributed.
However, in all seriousness America needs to deal for its crimes.
I will watch on television, for these injustices to be attributed.
However, in all seriousness America needs to deal for its crimes.
Re: RE: International Criminal Court
Recently several Americans
have expressed the idea that the U.S.'s interests would not be served by joining the International Criminal Court including a couple who are here now. What this does is eliminate any high and mighty posturing that the U.S. is somehow possessed with superior moral fibre and the rest of us mere mortals should take notice. The International Criminal Court is for the betterment of man, not just the U.S.. The Americans are currently infected with bottomline-itis. How can they be otherwise with a 9 trillion dollar debt?
cortez said:
Recently several Americans
have expressed the idea that the U.S.'s interests would not be served by joining the International Criminal Court including a couple who are here now. What this does is eliminate any high and mighty posturing that the U.S. is somehow possessed with superior moral fibre and the rest of us mere mortals should take notice. The International Criminal Court is for the betterment of man, not just the U.S.. The Americans are currently infected with bottomline-itis. How can they be otherwise with a 9 trillion dollar debt?
Re: RE: International Criminal Court
Same way we accumualte $51 Trillion in assets. I would hate to see how you balance a check book.
#juan said:
Same way we accumualte $51 Trillion in assets. I would hate to see how you balance a check book.
RE: International Crimina
In a regular court, if someone is charged with something and yet refuses to pay his debt to society, the court can take a measure of actions that will ensure this person's accountability. The World Court can't actually do that as it stands. It can rule in favor or against countries. However, if a country decides not to follow the World Court's decree, then nothing can be done. The World Court, for example, has no right to repossess the country's army. The real concern is how to get certain influential countries to actually listen to the International Court's rulings.
In a regular court, if someone is charged with something and yet refuses to pay his debt to society, the court can take a measure of actions that will ensure this person's accountability. The World Court can't actually do that as it stands. It can rule in favor or against countries. However, if a country decides not to follow the World Court's decree, then nothing can be done. The World Court, for example, has no right to repossess the country's army. The real concern is how to get certain influential countries to actually listen to the International Court's rulings.
It's not only the "influential" countries orpheus, how do you bring someone to trial when accused of a crime? For example, there is ample evidence Castro has executed people for being political opponents, how can you bring him to the international court?
RE: International Crimina
Well, that goes without saying. However, I would hope that influential countries demonstrate their leadership by being one of the first to cooperate. The International Court's efficiency must improve.
Well, that goes without saying. However, I would hope that influential countries demonstrate their leadership by being one of the first to cooperate. The International Court's efficiency must improve.
Re: RE: International Crimina
Most haven't, including Russia, China, India, but if your country isn't the US, there is no point in bashing.
cortez said:
Most haven't, including Russia, China, India, but if your country isn't the US, there is no point in bashing.
It just occurred to me, that the US Supreme Court is the highest court anyone can appeal. If the US ratified participation with the International Criminal Court, would we have to amend the US Constitution? For that matter, isn't the Canadian Supreme Court identified as the highest court in Canada in your Charter of Rights & Freedoms? And where does that put Canada? Anybody have any answers?