ICC to start investigation of Afghanistan

[Ifreann]

And again going back to that first post of mine, I said "help pressure", not "automagically succeed at".

---

I am only saying that you don't know what you're talking about. You're making things up to fill the gaps in your knowledge.


I already told you that the word is "realpolitik". One word, not a plural.

I know what I’m talking about.

You are mistaken.

The USA’s great power will be a relevant factor in how the case is investigated. Such is the case with power politics; the ICC is not above this dynamic.

How do you know? You know almost nothing about the ICC. You've said as much yourself. You don't know how they operate. You don't know if there is any way for the US to exercise power over them.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Oh boy this is going to be fun. I am sure Bensouda from The Gambia™ (yes its actually named like that) will deliever an most excellent performance; after all Bensouda was the solicitor general and legal adviser of gambian President Yahya Jammeh before becoming his Minister of Justice in August 1998 and being dismissed in March 2000.

Former gambian President Yahya Jammeh is renoved and internationally well known, amongst other things for declaring that he would rule a billion years if necessary. Which didn materialized as he was toppled in 2017 in a shortlived civil war inside The Gambia™.

He had also an most outstanding record in gay rights, too.

The legalities of Afghanistan are in experienced hands for sure. The best people after all. Exactly as promised by Trump.

Reminds me of how Yemen is on the UN Women executive board and Saudi Arabia is on the UN Human Rights Council.

These international organizations aren't sending their best.

Those international institutions are a fucking joke.

[Infected Mushroom]

I know what I’m talking about.

You are mistaken.

The USA’s great power will be a relevant factor in how the case is investigated. Such is the case with power politics; the ICC is not above this dynamic.

How do you know? You know almost nothing about the ICC. You've said as much yourself. You don't know how they operate. You don't know if there is any way for the US to exercise power over them.

my understanding is that I know enough to be able to participate in this discussion

less than the experts, but enough to be relevant

an amount in moderation

[The New California Republic]

How do you know? You know almost nothing about the ICC. You've said as much yourself. You don't know how they operate. You don't know if there is any way for the US to exercise power over them.

my understanding is that I know enough to be able to participate in this discussion

Your "participation" amounts to making up baseless stories, so for all intents and purposes worthless...

[Ifreann]

How do you know? You know almost nothing about the ICC. You've said as much yourself. You don't know how they operate. You don't know if there is any way for the US to exercise power over them.

my understanding is that I know enough to be able to participate in this discussion

less than the experts, but enough to be relevant

an amount in moderation

So explain how you know these things you are claiming to be true.

[James_xenoland]

Is the ICC still a thing?? LOL

I see the political push to continue past merely bait and switch propaganda with the war in Afghanistan is in full force.

[Vistulange]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

[Loben The 2nd]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

they likely ran out of Serb war criminals or African warlords to annoy.

[Novus America]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

Well it will probably just be symbolic anyways but the are investigating all parties, not just the US.
Given other parties, including the worst (Taliban) might be subject to it, it could in theory do some good if the are able to prosecute some of the many Afghans who are war criminals.

[Vistulange]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

they likely ran out of Serb war criminals or African warlords to annoy.

The world had a shortage of the former? Huh, that's new.

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

Well it will probably just be symbolic anyways but the are investigating all parties, not just the US.
Given other parties, including the worst (Taliban) might be subject to it, it could in theory do some good if the are able to prosecute some of the many Afghans who are war criminals.

I mean, sure, Afghanistan is a party to the Rome Statute, but I'm curious just how compliant the fucking Taliban will be when the ICC want to try their folk.

[Novus America]

they likely ran out of Serb war criminals or African warlords to annoy.

The world had a shortage of the former? Huh, that's new.

Well it will probably just be symbolic anyways but the are investigating all parties, not just the US.
Given other parties, including the worst (Taliban) might be subject to it, it could in theory do some good if the are able to prosecute some of the many Afghans who are war criminals.

I mean, sure, Afghanistan is a party to the Rome Statute, but I'm curious just how compliant the fucking Taliban will be when the ICC want to try their folk.

Well yes, one would expect them to be not very compliant to say the least.
But the government has a large number of them in custody.

I still expect it to go nowhere but in theory it could hypothetically not be totally pointless.

[The of Korea]

they likely ran out of Serb war criminals or African warlords to annoy.

The world had a shortage of the former? Huh, that's new.

Well it will probably just be symbolic anyways but the are investigating all parties, not just the US.
Given other parties, including the worst (Taliban) might be subject to it, it could in theory do some good if the are able to prosecute some of the many Afghans who are war criminals.

I mean, sure, Afghanistan is a party to the Rome Statute, but I'm curious just how compliant the fucking Taliban will be when the ICC want to try their folk.

and now that things are cooling down between the taliban and the afghani government, the Afghani government might also not enforce ICC rulings and indictments so as to not rock the boat.

[Gormwood]

Anyhow. Back to seriousness.

While the ICC investigations probably have the opportunity to give us a diplomatic bruise or two, it's not like we aren't in the habit of prosecuting war criminals under our own laws. But with Trump in charge I'm not actually sure.

If we were still in the Obama years, I could see him selling the troops out to avoid ruffling feathers. Dropping the ICC a few token fall guys. Trump however a.) Doesn't seem to give a shit about war crimes, as evidenced by the whole affair of that guy who was posing with a corpse, and the more serious accusations that came up later. B.) Has already set a tone of non-compliance and adversarial behaviour With the UN, meaning it's not a far leap to take the same stance with the ICC, particularly given we aren't signatories to the Rome Statute.

So I guess the answer depends a lot on who wins the election and how long the ICC investigation/trials take.

This is of course, assuming the ICC charges US troops at all. Which they might not.

prosecuting war criminals is "selling out the troops"? Tf?

They should be honored, just like Eddie Gallagher!

[The East Marches II]

prosecuting war criminals is "selling out the troops"? Tf?

They should be honored, just like Eddie Gallagher!

Good suggestion Gauth :^)

[US-SSR]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

Torturers are enemies of all humanity. Any nation can detain, charge, try, convict, sentence and/or incarcerate them. I assume that goes for the ICC.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

The ICC also has jurisdiction over people who committed crimes in an ICC member state, even if their country of origin is not a member.

[The East Marches II]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

Torturers are enemies of all humanity. Any nation can detain, charge, try, convict, sentence and/or incarcerate them. I assume that goes for the ICC.

Then I suggest they try it. Maybe they can send one of their impotent little letters with the officious letterhead.

[US-SSR]

Torturers are enemies of all humanity. Any nation can detain, charge, try, convict, sentence and/or incarcerate them. I assume that goes for the ICC.

Then I suggest they try it. Maybe they can send one of their impotent little letters with the officious letterhead.

Maybe Eddie Gallagher can turn himself in to The Hague as a test case.

[Loben The 2nd]

Then I suggest they try it. Maybe they can send one of their impotent little letters with the officious letterhead.

Maybe Eddie Gallagher can turn himself in to The Hague as a test case.

Good joke.

[Vistulange]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

The ICC also has jurisdiction over people who committed crimes in an ICC member state, even if their country of origin is not a member.

It does, but it cannot investigate the citizen of a non-Rome Statute country unless referred to by the UNSC. Of which the US is a permanent member.

[The Emerald Legion]

My head is a tad bit slow today, so forgive me if I've grossly misunderstood something.

What exactly is the ICC investigating? To my knowledge, the ICC is authorised to investigate individuals whose state is a member to the Rome Statute. The US used to be one - it is not, any longer. Therefore, the only way for a US citizen to be tried by the ICC is through a United Nations Security Council vote, of which the US is a permanent member, giving it veto power. Putting two and two together, unless the current administration (or the one that is at the helm when proceedings can actually begin) is willing to throw its own folk under the bus, no US citizen is going to get tried by the ICC anytime soon.

Probably just symbolic.

Torturers are enemies of all humanity. Any nation can detain, charge, try, convict, sentence and/or incarcerate them. I assume that goes for the ICC.

Oh come on. That's just nonsensical. 90% of politics is torture. I mean, just TRY to watch C-span.

[The East Marches II]

Then I suggest they try it. Maybe they can send one of their impotent little letters with the officious letterhead.

Maybe Eddie Gallagher can turn himself in to The Hague as a test case.

I should like to see The Hague leveled by airstrikes or shelling (of course with no deaths as I am a man of peace). This seems a good way to accomplish that. I am for it.