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

[MrFun]

Unfortunately, it's just the usual way many American leaders see international relations.

They want the United States to run the world, but they do not want any responsibility when they make mistakes, or commit deliberate crimes.

[TCO]

Existing law would make it very easy for the court to take action against a military vessel that didn't give aid to sailors that it had put in the water. Go read up Imran.

"There is nothing that says" my sweet ass...you little cheap debater.

[TCO]

i don't want the US to run the world...I don't want the world interfiering with our sovereignty either.

9Does that make me an isolationist?)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Existing law would make it very easy for the court to take action against a military vessel that didn't give aid to sailors that it had put in the water. Go read up Imran.

Quote me part of the Rome Statute that says Admiralty Law must be followed. Go ahead, do it. And a military vessel that didn't take action wouldn't be systematic violator of Crimes against Humanity or War Crimes .

All it adds up to is that you haven't read the Rome Statute, and you just don't care. Just want to throw scare tactics around and make the US isolationist.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
We should do more!

Like this?

[TCO]

There is a long tradtion of requiring mariners to assist those in distress, Imran. Go read up on this area and you may feeel different.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Decent start, but $500 million? Um... perhaps he doesn't realize how big a problem AIDS is in Africa?

[Imran Siddiqui]

There is a long tradtion of requiring mariners to assist those in distress, Imran. Go read up on this area and you may feeel different.

Now can you tell me where it is in the Rome Statute? Stop evading the question and put your money where you mouth is. The ICC is based on the Rome Statute. Quote for me the section where it says the ICC can prosecute for that (which isn't a War Crime or a Crime against Humanity, and definetly ISN'T systematic or repeated).

[Lincoln]

You are talking about creating a huge quagmire Imran. In the heat of battle a lot of things can be considered war crimes by any pompus court who may have an axe to grind with another nation. And what does "systematic" mean -- 3, 4, 12 times? The point is that while the court is deciding what is and what is not a "war crime" or "systematic" the defendant sits in jail.

[Sandman]

I like Europe's committment to foreign aid.

I wouldn't call it a commitment. The EU is essentially a farming cartel with 'other interests'. Abolishing the farming subsidies would help much more than aid. Cut down the immigrants risking death as well.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In the heat of battle a lot of things can be considered war crimes by any pompus court who may have an axe to grind with another nation.

Axe to grind... I hear this a lot. Another scare tactic. I see no proof this will ever happen.

[Lincoln]

You are more trusting than I am then.

[Jaakko]

How much larger is the chance of this court being used for wrong, political reasons than is the chance of the US using force for wrong, political reasons?

In other words, do y'all think your **** don't stink?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Another scare tactic. I see no proof this will ever happen.

Expect the worst, hope for the best. It save you from a Pollyannish mind set such as this.

[Guynemer]

Anyone else envisioning that record executive guy from the "Chef Aid" episode of South Park?

"I AM ABOVE THE LAW!"

As far as international diplomacy goes, our administration is really screwing the pooch.