Comments on: European Jurisprudence is Insane, Part 2

By: ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Lest I be criticized for being soft on Nazis…

Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:47:24 +0000

[...] (More on Europe’s INSANE jurisprudence in regards to war crimes here, here, here, here… you get the point.) What say you? [...]

By: ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » French Judge issues warrant for Rwandan President

Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:36:35 +0000

[...] (Europe’s peculiar approach to “human rights” laws have been previously discussed here, here, and here.) [...]

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 21:54:06 +0000

“Any prosecutor or judge in the US that targeted jaywalkers while ignoring serial killers cases would be thrown out of office. That’s the “point”Ã�? between the comparison.”

So the US don’t have to acknowledge the ICC or ICJ, because there are worse regimes in the world?

And before we all live in a “global village” it’s hard to make a case for international law to become binding to every single state / government w/o compromising their natural right to sovereignty.

By: Curzon

Curzon — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:05:34 +0000

Jim: You’re running a global current affairs blog and you can’t see the difference between US soldiers shelling Hotel Palestine during wartime and totalitarian regimes in Burma and North Korea exterminating millions of people? Any prosecutor or judge in the US that targeted jaywalkers while ignoring serial killers cases would be thrown out of office. That’s the “point” between the comparison.

That is also the difference between focusing on grossly evil international crimes, like genocide and crimes against humanity, whereas war crimes are inevitably defined by either the winner or non-participants. See Robert McNamara in the Fog of War — “we were behaving as war criminals, but what makes it immoral if you lose but not if you win?”

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:55 +0000

So the international laws shouldn’t be binding to the US military?

Well, they are so binding on the Iranian hostage takers… The international community’s response to that sure proved IL was a vital subject!

IL is a form of counterveiling power — a tool to give weak states stand-off capability against strong ones. It is as morally neutral as lead bullets, and should be recognized as such.

Regardless, the ICC and the Spanish claims are only loosely related.

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:40:55 +0000

So the international laws shouldn’t be binding to the US military? What’s the point of comparing US and Myanmar or Somalia in this case? This post was lost before it was born…

By: GI Korea

GI Korea — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:03:45 +0000

If you want to read more about the actual incident in question go ahead and access the link below:

http://jetiranger.tripod.com/BLOG/index.blog?entry_id=1256429

It is clear IMHO that these three soldiers are not war criminals and the Spanish courts are using the indictments to score their own political points with their public knowing full well the US will not hand over these soldiers. I am confident the ICC would do the same thing if the US were to sign on to their treaty.

By: Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace

Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 00:57:25 +0000

In fact the first ever indictments by the ICC have just been handed down: five members of The Lords Resistance Army in Uganda
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/ce9140728612c6e058ac554757866685.htm

It seems a popular move, albeit with implications for the fragile peace process….

By: Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace

Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace — Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:55:35 +0000

Before we get too excited, is there any evidence that the ICC would take any notice of what a loony Spanish lefty judge did? While this will support those with concerns that the ICC may be an unfriendly venue for the US, such foolishness is surely not “solid evidence”….

By: Chirol

Chirol — Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:18:38 +0000

Thanks for yet more solid evidence that the ICC is bad idea and that the US’s misgivings are completely justified.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:51:32 +0000

This is why US fears about the International Criminal Court are valid.

Big Cheese agrees completely.

What about North Korea? Or the thugs in Myanmar? Or the regime in the Sudan? What about Somali pirates or Congo rebels?

As even Big Cheese agrees, the ICC is political, so what do you expect?