Article

2004-05-22 International-UN-NGOs

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2004-05-22 12:00:00 AM|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I guess the USA is just supposed to ignore its pesky old constitution and learn to behave like a good little euroweenie.

Screw the ICC.

Posted by JP 2004-05-22 12:09:26 AM|| 2004-05-22 12:09:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I say we tell the UN to go F themselves. I dont know of a more useless organization -- even the Department of Social and Health Services does something useful.

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-05-22 12:25:35 AM|| 2004-05-22 12:25:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 No exemptions, no peacekeepers. Period.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-05-22 12:29:52 AM|| [http://www.polipundit.com] 2004-05-22 12:29:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The Euros are always prattling on about peace, so they should be the "peacekeepers."

We'll be the war keepers, since they're too goddam lazy and wussy to be. But the wars will be to protect our country and people - along with REAL allies like Britain and Australia. The "peace-loving" ~~dhimmis~~ Euros can go hang.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-05-22 12:35:40 AM|| 2004-05-22 12:35:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 I don't understand this. Since the U.S. hasn't ratified the treaty that established the ICC, why is an "exemption" being sought from something we're not bound to?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-05-22 1:11:21 AM|| 2004-05-22 1:11:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 So much hand-wringing, buzzing off to 5-star hotels to convene countless pointless meetings - all wasted noise and motion in an obviously futile pretense that the UN and ICC are either viable or worthy institutions. Pfeh. Withdraw and rethink, redesign workable rational systems, learning from the mistakes of the past - both of these are not just fatally flawed, they are already dead. Full stop.

Posted by .com 2004-05-22 1:15:07 AM|| 2004-05-22 1:15:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Yep, what Dot sez.

Posted by Lucky 2004-05-22 1:16:30 AM|| 2004-05-22 1:16:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Nobody says it like Dotcom, do they?!
I love it!

Posted by Jen 2004-05-22 1:18:35 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-22 1:18:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 I hate it because of the people that like it. Aris loves it. That's enough for me.
Nothing like having the asshatted Eastern European version of "social justice" crammed down ones throat.

Posted by abaddon 2004-05-22 2:08:45 AM|| 2004-05-22 2:08:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 abaddon, Screw Aris.
Do what everybody here does most of the time--Ignore him.
Whatever he's saying, it's all Greek to us! LOL

Posted by Jen 2004-05-22 3:55:31 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-22 3:55:31 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Bomb-a-rama - We seek exemptions via treaties with nations that are members of the ICC because when US citizens leave US soil they are subject to the laws and courts of the lands they visit. This gives rise to a couple of reasons for the bilateral agreements: 1) to prevent ICC jurisdiction being exercised over US troops by the nations in which we operate, and 2) to prevent ICC jurisdiction being exercised over US troops on foreign soil by other foreign entities who are also present there. Thus three components are necessary to completely insulate US troops from this little fiasco: 1) non-ratification of the ICC treaty by the Senate; 2) bi-lateral agreements with all nations in which we might operate; and 3) bi-lateral agreements with all nations with whom we might operate. Even then that might not be enough when we operate in areas officially designated as a UN protectorates that are actively administered by the UN and not a local government.

Posted by AzCat 2004-05-22 6:35:26 AM|| 2004-05-22 6:35:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.

Which category does the Abu Ghraib abuse go under? I can't seem to figure it out.

Posted by Rafael 2004-05-22 7:42:23 AM|| 2004-05-22 7:42:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 There are many reasons for rejectying the ICC like

1) A court who is basically making its own law instead of abiding by it.

2) No appeal

3) No trial by jury. For grievous offences it has been a constant to make them judge not by mere magistrates looking for precedents and hair splitting laws but by the entire nation personificated by a jury, by people judging according to their consciences not by mee judges.

4) Jurys and judges are selected in a way who tries to guarantee their fairness. Here they are slected by states, states who have interests and who will nominate judges likely to defend them or harm their opponents. Nietzche said: "States are the coldest of the cold monsters". And states will not hesitate to have someone jailed life if it can harm a rival state.

Posted by JFM 2004-05-22 8:14:25 AM|| 2004-05-22 8:14:25 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 "I hate it because of the people that like it. Aris loves it. "

Actually I don't remember ever saying that I love the ICC either. Is that yet another one of your LIES about me?

Though I do remember once noting the hypocrisy that the USA urged other countries (e.g. Serbia, Croatia so forth) to send their own citizens to be judged there.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-05-22 8:50:34 AM|| 2004-05-22 8:50:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 Courts and laws only have meaning if there exists the means to enforce them. Anybody seriously believe an "international court" can pass judgement on the US and "enforce" a penalty. This whole exercise is just more mental masturbation by a bunch of impotent fools.

Posted by RWV 2004-05-22 9:48:50 AM|| 2004-05-22 9:48:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 If we in the US run into the situation such as developed in Abu Graib, we work to fix it and make it right, despite having gobs of excrement heaped upon us by everyone and their mother. When Sammy was doing his HEAVY DUTY thing in Abu Graib, only a few specialized organizations were making a yap. This is hypocracy by the so-called world communityâ¢.

We do not make deals with ANYONE that will result in the subjugation of our Constitution. It is what makes us who we are. I think that bilateral agreements are the way to go. And that applies to most of the present functions and relationships with the UN. There are important agencies that set standards, such as ICAO for worldwide aviation that should exist. They should be self-standing and funded by member countries. They should not be a part of the totally corrupt and wasteful UN. It is just another Leage of Nations that went bad long ago.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-05-22 1:49:04 PM|| 2004-05-22 1:49:04 PM|| Front Page Top

17:50 docob
17:33 Ptah
09:22 Raptor
08:27 Billy Hank
05:25 ed
04:33 Mark Espinola
04:16 Jen
04:13 Jen
04:03 Mark Espinola
03:47 Mark Espinola
03:44 Mark Espinola
02:52 Zenster
01:42 Anonymous4617
00:34 Jen
23:39 muck4doo
23:24 Steve White
23:18 CrazyFool
23:15 Phil Fraering
23:05 Alaska Paul
23:02 Ptah
23:00 Alaska Paul
22:59 Atomic Conspiracy
22:54 Atomic Conspiracy
22:48 Frank G