U.S. will withdraw from U.N. peacekeeping unless troops are exempted from world court

[Sandman]

Yeah...just like you policed up the Balkans on your own. No? Oh that's right...

I'll have you know I beat off the entire Serbian army with a wet comb and a deep fried mars bar supper.

I was thinking more along the lines of fighting epidemics and poverty, not testing new missiles on whichever dictator is flavour of the month.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Who are you protecting Europe from these days, GP?

Nobody. It's kind of wierd how they still look to the US for leadership while criticising us though. Reminds me of that Onion story...

I meean if they really want to be independant, they shouldn't spend so much time and psychic energy trying to look for hypocracy (like a teenager questioning a parent.) I could give a **** about that kind of crap with my parents after I moved out at age 18. They're people...I just tak em at that and ditcht the childish attitude of looking for perfection...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sandman,

I like Europe's committment to foreign aid.

[Lincoln]

I was talking about an hypothetical incident that could very well have happened. We almost collided with a Russian sub for example. We were supposedly protecting our country from nuclear attack. What if after the collision we didn't rescue all or any of the crew because of the necessary secrecy?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Sandman
I was thinking more along the lines of fighting epidemics and poverty,

We aren't withdrawing from that though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I was talking about an hypothetical incident that could very well have happened. We almost collided with a Russian sub for example. We were supposedly protecting our country from nuclear attack. What if after the collision we didn't rescue all or any of the crew because of the necessary secrecy?

Ain't prosecutable. There is nothing that says you have to save the lives of your enemy soldiers. There is nothing about enemy soldiers, except you can't directly kill them after they've surrendered. You don't have to pick them up out of the water.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sandman


I'll have you know I beat off the entire Serbian army with a wet comb and a deep fried mars bar supper.

I was thinking more along the lines of fighting epidemics and poverty, not testing new missiles on whichever dictator is flavour of the month.

Yeah for that, you drag us in while *****ing at us at the same time. or you sure yoou all are not one of my ex-gfs?

[Imran Siddiqui]

We aren't withdrawing from that though.

We do a pitiful amount of it though. Less than 1% of our budget.

[Lincoln]

Well they weren't really "enemy" because it was a cold war. And in peace time it is necessary under international law to help a ship in distress.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I was talking about an hypothetical incident that could very well have happened. We almost collided with a Russian sub for example. We were supposedly protecting our country from nuclear attack. What if after the collision we didn't rescue all or any of the crew because of the necessary secrecy?

Ain't prosecutable. There is nothing that says you have to save the lives of your enemy soldiers. There is nothing about enemy soldiers, except you can't directly kill them after they've surrendered. You don't have to pick them up out of the water.

go read up on some admiralty law. you're way off base. This is one of the oldest and riches aprts of "international law", young wannabe shyster.

[Imran Siddiqui]

go read up on some admiralty law. you're way off base. This is one of the oldest and riches aprts of "international law", young wannabe shyster.

And go read the Rome Statute . You are a way off base!

The ICC can't prosecute on 'International Law'. Just crimes in times of war, crimes against humanity, etc. Read up on things before you comment, GP.

And Lincoln, doesn't matter.

[civman2000]

They also fear U.S. officials and soldiers could be subject to political prosecutions, which Europeans say is unlikely.

Since when was this a bad thing? This is one of the most hypocritical self-centered things any country has ever done (well, i take that back, there are many worse things, but you get the idea)

[TCO]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

We aren't withdrawing from that though.

We do a pitiful amount of it though. Less than 1% of our budget.

1. Well...so what. It's not a wolrd socialism yet.

2. we are a force for peace an normalcy (ave me all the individial nitpicks). If we weren't around the world would be a lot rougher in plenty of places. This was especially true during the cold War. Less so now.

3. International Agencies do a lousy job with aid. It goes to socialistic regimes and results in terrible makerowrk fiascos and in weapons purchases. Read The Ugly American. You will learn something about foreign aid.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
We do a pitiful amount of it though. Less than 1% of our budget.

And? He was acting like we were withdrawing from the UN entirely.

[Imran Siddiqui]

We should do more! Africa isn't going to solve the AIDS crisis itself. To get away with funds being misused, we should go in ourselves and help. Educate people on safe sex (never happen with conservative Republicans in power though). So what if the world would be rougher if we didn't go around? Some places we made things worse. That doesn't absolve us.