The US will soon run out of allies if it keeps acting like this

[KrazyHorse]

I can assure you that if an American, once aquitted by the United States of war crimes, is arrested while on a trip abroad, we very much would care and would act in some fashion - up to and including the use of force

You would be lacking justification, and it would be, as I stated before, a unilateral declaration of extraterritorial rights.

For your information, I'm not rude to those I respect. You've proven yourself to be either muddleheaded, miinformed, or able to put on a superb imitation of the above.

You've got a smattering of education, but when it comes down to it, you're a Giancarlo with better grammar.

You post inane lies, obvious misinterpretations, and fraudulent chains of logic. There are innumerable people here who have the same set of opinions, when it comes down to it, but I at least hold most of them in some esteem as fit partners for discussion.

Now please explain how the principle of national sovereignty is violated by arresting foreign nationals in your own country without the approval of their home countries.

You step in somebody else's sandbox, you play by their rules. It's as old an idea as the nation itself is.

[Saint Marcus]

When in Rome, do as the Romans

[Bereta_Eder]

correct

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by paiktis22
It is obvious that there is much distaste and anger against the US in Europe.

Not half as much as we feel for ingrates like you, ol buddy.
People like you are why a lot of us want an end to alliances with your country and many others.

With people like some here, I can see why.

The inverse is over-whemingly the case.

The US can dissapear tomorrow and the world will be a better place

Funny, we think the same thing about you, so we still have something in common after all.

and Yes the US is THE rogue state today, not Saddam.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Lest any of you hotheads get the wrong idea, Paitkis is a buddy of mine and remains so, so control yourselves when you attempt some inane comeback.

[Bereta_Eder]

Chris, blame it on monneypenny (=dinodoc) who had the nerve to say the Greece "sponsored" 17N in one of the finest days of our modern history, namely our success in attacking the spectre of terrorism after so long.

[Chris 62]

I know how you really feel, but "offically", I'm required to strike back.

[Bereta_Eder]

I know

[Chris 62]

Love the "Billy Idol" thing BTW.

[Bereta_Eder]

Thanks

Ok I stop the trolling since you are here now
Besides, dinodoc got served anyway

[Chris 62]

I'm killing time while we set up the B-B-Q.

[Bereta_Eder]

Have a good time

[Chris 62]

We will, having a nice party, no terrorists allowed.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Huh... I agree with Markus (partly). Damn, I thought I'd never have to say that . The way we are going, we are going to be international pariahs. We can't ask for global trade and then say we are going to be isolationists in global politics. I mean, who the Hell are we going to trade with? We back out of international politics, and our global trade falls with it, because who is really going to care about trading with us when they can get something from one of their friends? It works all the time. Sometimes people will buy a slightly more expensive thing from a friend rather than a cheaper thing from a guy you don't like.

Treading to very thin, very stupid line here. I only hope that when we fall (and all states rise and fall, so it will happen) that Europe and the rest of the world takes pity on us. We can blame it on the alcohol .

[Saint Marcus]

It's a shame a country so nice could elect rulers so bad.

[Ned]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

I can assure you that if an American, once aquitted by the United States of war crimes, is arrested while on a trip abroad, we very much would care and would act in some fashion - up to and including the use of force

You would be lacking justification, and it would be, as I stated before, a unilateral declaration of extraterritorial rights.

For your information, I'm not rude to those I respect. You've proven yourself to be either muddleheaded, miinformed, or able to put on a superb imitation of the above.

You've got a smattering of education, but when it comes down to it, you're a Giancarlo with better grammar.

You post inane lies, obvious misinterpretations, and fraudulent chains of logic. There are innumerable people here who have the same set of opinions, when it comes down to it, but I at least hold most of them in some esteem as fit partners for discussion.

Now please explain how the principle of national sovereignty is violated by arresting foreign nationals in your own country without the approval of their home countries.

You step in somebody else's sandbox, you play by their rules. It's as old an idea as the nation itself is.

A step in the right direction, KH.

The hypo: Citizen of A country is in country B. He has committed no crime in country B. Country B arrests him, puts him in jail and throws away the key.

This is a classic case where virtually every country will at least intervene diplomatically on behalf of their national unfairly locked up. Whether this escallates into more depends on the reaction of country B

Next, country B transports the citizen to the Hague for trial under the ICC based on an accusation of country C of war crimes. If country A has already tried their citizen, fairly, and it is not a sham trial, there is no jurisdiction in the ICC. Country A would complain both to country B and demand of the ICC the immediate return of their citizen.

It is the first duty of a sovereign to protect their citizens at home or abroad. It their citizens are arrested abroad, the sovereign must assure that the citizens is accorded due process. Violation of fundamental prinicples of double jeopardy by the ICC is not due process and will provoke country A to protest, or more, depending.