[flagged]
ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
81–90 of 1001 posts
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#82>In his first response to the ICC issuing a warrant for his arrest on allegations of war crimes, Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has described the ruling as “absurd and false lies” and said the decision is “antisemitic.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/nov/21/internati...
If Netanyahu and Gallant really think they are innocent, and the allegations are absurd and false, they should cooperate with the ICC. Have your day in court and show how absurd the accusations are. If you're not willing to do that, it seems reasonable for the public to draw a proverbial negative inference.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#83[flagged]
I'm wondering what power does the ICC have to carry out its sentencing if the US chooses to disagree with it? Same with The Hague court, where the US said its soldiers would be imune from standing trial for crimes. So if these international courts are only allowed selective enforcement, what's the point of their existence? To only prosecute people the US doesn't choose to protect? Then what's the line between good gu…
what power does the ICC have to carry out its sentencing if the US chooses to agree with it?
It is not if the US was on board it would lead an invasion of Israel.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many signatories who are obliged to arrest anyone with an ICC warrant: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/states-parties
Obliged by who? The US can choose to wipe their ass with whatever they signed and arbitrarily say NO to a request they don't like. Who's gonna hold them accountable for breaking their signed agreement? Wasn't there the same pitfall with the League of Nations?
I was just answering your question my friend. Given the states are not party to the ICC, they have very little to do with it. But to your point: what teeth does the ICC have? In theory the 120ish other countries that WOULD arrest someone with a warrant, south korea, ausieland, canada etc. In theory.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#85"The Chamber therefore found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare." Whats perhaps interesting to note is that this charge was made for "just" 41 [1] confirmed starvation deaths among a population of 2,141,643 people [2]. Of course every death caused by intentional starvation is a severe crime and must be puni…
[flagged]
If the US, or any European country, started letting Palestinian refugees in en masse, a lot of them would manage to get there. Egypt’s culpability here is the most salient because they’re physically closest; but I don’t see how that makes the country uniquely culpable for failing to prevent a preventable situation.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is incredibly likely another series of warrants will be issued for the next level down of both Israeli and Hamas leadership. It is too bad Lebanon didn't ratify the ICC treaty. They really should have.
[flagged]
I would totally get behind ICC charges against Hezbollah. Bad actors need consequences.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#87Wow, this took a long time to come after the application for the warrants. 185 days compared to 23 days for Putin's arrest warrant — but then again, one was against the wishes of the USA and the west while the other was at their behest.
And the US has threatened to invade NL if ICC warrants one of them.
So much for the ICC: a banana court.
It felt so real when Milosovic was trialed: now we all know the true nature of these show trials.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#88I m afraid this fruitless pursuit will distract from the effort to stop the cleansing, which has to be diplomatic and international
So you want to say that the reason for _not_ doing this is: it will distract from the effort to stop the cleansing. Would that be the same as saying that we shouldn't issue a warrant against a school shooter because it wouldn't stop the shooting? Would it distract from gun laws? Maybe not the best analogy, but I know that I cannot say for certain whether it will negatively or positively affect the effort. It might po…
>It might positively affect if this makes (especially EU) countries put more pressure on Israel.
That would never happen. Israel is above any and all criticism, how do people not realize that by now?
Pressure, sanctions, whatever - nothing will actually happen. Likud can trot out the tired trope of antisemitism and any and all criticism, legitimate or not, is automatically waved away. Like it or not, that's objective reality.
Before the shills come in and accuse me of this or that, let me be clear: NO, I don't support Hamas, Likud, or any organization that supports the killing of innocent people. Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, Palestine has a right to exist and defend itself.
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm wondering what power does the ICC have to carry out its sentencing if the US chooses to disagree with it? Same with The Hague court, where the US said its soldiers would be imune from standing trial for crimes. So if these international courts are only allowed selective enforcement, what's the point of their existence? To only prosecute people the US doesn't choose to protect? Then what's the line between good gu…
It’s really rather simple. Anyone on this planet only has as much authority as their guns provide them. The people who operate these courts have fewer guns than the US, so they don’t get authority over US interests.
what exactly do you think would happen differently if you took the US out of the picture?
Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm wondering what power does the ICC have to carry out its sentencing if the US chooses to disagree with it? Same with The Hague court, where the US said its soldiers would be imune from standing trial for crimes. So if these international courts are only allowed selective enforcement, what's the point of their existence? To only prosecute people the US doesn't choose to protect? Then what's the line between good gu…
It’s really rather simple. Anyone on this planet only has as much authority as their guns provide them. The people who operate these courts have fewer guns than the US, so they don’t get authority over US interests.
US interests is a very broad category, it frequently doesn’t get its way.
There’s tit for tat involved where things might escalate to the point where the US kills some people via airstrikes, but it simply can’t escalate everything to a full on war.