International Criminal Court Watch

This discussion is closed.
USUK1
Badges: 0
#1
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#1
Today the US announced it was dropping opposition to the International Criminal Court but the reality is much different.

1. Currently the US has over agreements with 85 countries agreeing US forces will not be put to trial without agreement.

2. The US is rethinking its contributions to Peace Keeping operations. The US to UN Ambassador said today

"In the absence of a new resolution, the United States will need to take into account the risk of ICC (International Criminal Court) review when determining contributions to U.N. authorized or established operations."

(Massive blow to Europeans who like the US to pay for and provide for operations)

3. If US soldiers are brought to trial where the US disagrees the US will take action to secure their release anyway.

It makes me happy that we (the USA) are still not bowing to European demands to give up the security of sovereingty of our troops. What do you think????
0
Outrageous
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 14 years ago
#2
But its ok for the any other country but the US to abide by these rules right? and to give up their soverignity? What makes US troops so much different from say UK troops, Balkan troops, French Troops? The excemption stands indicates how easy it is to avoid accounting for actions. This special treatment must cease or else I support all pother countries in being excempted too. The purpose of an international crime court in Hagg was just that - internationl crime court. Not international minus US. However reality of course is different. Must be a blast being an american soldier engaged in the atrocities plastered over all news papers. No responsibility. Uncle sam will save you. Thank god not all american soldiers are alike and that is the only hope for the future.
0
kriztinae
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 14 years ago
#3
(Original post by Outrageous)
But its ok for the any other country but the US to abide by these rules right? and to give up their soverignity? What makes US troops so much different from say UK troops, Balkan troops, French Troops? The excemption stands indicates how easy it is to avoid accounting for actions. This special treatment must cease or else I support all pother countries in being excempted too. The purpose of an international crime court in Hagg was just that - internationl crime court. Not international minus US. However reality of course is different. Must be a blast being an american soldier engaged in the atrocities plastered over all news papers. No responsibility. Uncle sam will save you. Thank god not all american soldiers are alike and that is the only hope for the future.
excellent answer, i have nothing to add
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 14 years ago
#4
hehe, my two favourite girls quickest to respond!
0
randdom
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 14 years ago
#5
see answer to duplicate thread
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 14 years ago
#6
(Original post by Outrageous)
But its ok for the any other country but the US to abide by these rules right?
the or any country?

if they want to, they can abide by them. their decision. the US decided it didnt want to, their decision.

and to give up their soverignity? What makes US troops so much different from say UK troops, Balkan troops, French Troops?
not much. theres nothing stopping any of these troops doing the same.
who are the Balkan troops?

The excemption stands indicates how easy it is to avoid accounting for actions. This special treatment
special treatment?

must cease or else I support all pother countries in being excempted too.
thats their right, no one stopping them.

The purpose of an international crime court in Hagg was just that - internationl crime court. Not international minus US.
However reality of course is different.
indeed, like the UN, nice idea but not perfect.

Must be a blast being an american soldier engaged in the atrocities plastered over all news papers.
there is another world out there.
0
kriztinae
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 14 years ago
#7
(Original post by vienna95)
hehe, my two favourite girls quickest to respond!
oh dear are you really that old?
0
Jonatan
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8
Report 14 years ago
#8
Had the US been able to follow their own constitution they would not need to worry about it in teh first place. The US administration should worry more about how to keep their soldiers and officers (and their own short sighted policies) from violating humanitarian rights.

One thing is to invade Iraq despite of the UNs wish, that I can understand. A completely different thing is not to carry out the operation within the limits of humanitarian rights.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 14 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jonatan)
Had the US been able to follow their own constitution they would not need to worry about it in teh first place. The US administration should worry more about how to keep their soldiers and officers (and their own short sighted policies) from violating humanitarian rights.
the US? who does that refer to exactly?
which authorised policies would these be?

the operation within the limits of humanitarian rights.
please, put some context on it.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have a role model?

Yes - I know them personally (293)
26.11%
Yes - they're famous (283)
25.22%
No I don't (546)
48.66%

Watched Threads

View All