ICC = Kangaroo court
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: ICC = Kangaroo court

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,161

    Smile ICC = Kangaroo court

    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L16707885.htm
    EU sees no chance US to accept international court
    It's a politically driven court; no **** we're not accepting anything. Its just frivolous grandstanding, that's all. We all saw what happened the last time a little pressure was applied to that broke-ass economy in Belgium, they caved into the US dollar and Euro, respectively. Seriously though, these knuckleheads have enormously weak moral convictions. This so-called "court" has absolutely no laurels, no scruples, whatsoever. What a joke.


  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,424
    Aren't all courts politically driven?
    We have international police nicely co-operating, so why not international courts? You want the police to catch the bad guys, and then have no foot to stand on because there's no laws? I'm pretty sure any cop will tell you that the worst thing about the job is the justice apparatus not being up to par.

    It's an attempt for change. If an Iranian soldier would murder an American soldier in Congo, would you still be against an international court? Would you still take the risk of an Iranian court letting the Iranian soldier go? Congo wouldn't care - what if Iran wouldn't care (and they don't)? An international court is an attempt to change those rules. The Iranians could say "No! We only want Iranians to be tried in Iranian courts!" - yeah, good luck... they'd probably get a medal. I can understand Iran to be against an international court, but the US?

    And Belgium has a very healthy economy: the debt is around 100% of the GDP (in the US, it's only 62%), and a perfect budget (let's not talk about the US budget, shall we)... I know you snuck that comment in especially for me

  3. #3
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    The question I would ask is how would some international court police it's jurisdiction? It cannot. So maybe their is some truth to the Kangeroo comment? The policing action would be left to each government so that sort of cancels out any benefit?
    West of House
    You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
    There is a small mailbox here.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,424
    CIA, Interpol, MI5... over-the-borders "police" forces.

  5. #5
    T̙͓̞̣̯ͦͭͅͅȂͧͭͧ̏̈͏̖̖Z̿ ͆̎̄
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    3,171
    I think it's a question of impartiality...like a crime being committed in California gets sent someplace else in order to ensure a fair and impartial jury and trial.

    Right now all we have are extradiction laws to bring people back to the scene of the crime to stand trial. I believe, and I might be mistaken, this is suppose to replace extradiction or at least provide an alternative to, by allowing the trial to be held in a country other than those involved. An impartial country.

    I don't think they're suggesting an actual court set-up...more of a determining body which decides where the trial will be held and under what conditions...similiar to war-crime tribunals. I think it's a good idea...if you were falsely accused of collaborating with the Nazi's...would you want to be tried in Isreal ?

    This may actually help in the release of thousands of detained and imprisoned people held in foreign jails around the world...I'm surprised Amnesty International hasn't jumped on this and started appeal processes.


    Eg

  6. #6
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    In most "civilized" countries I have the right to be tried by a jury of my peers. I find it hard to believe that you will find impartial "peers" for an American in many countries in the world. The cultural differences alone make this difficult.... Add the predisposition to feel "differently" about those of other nationalities makes this whole ICC thing all a bit of a mess.

    Besides, I'm English..... We have _no_ peers but other Englishmen.....
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  7. #7
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    CIA, Interpol, MI5... over-the-borders "police" forces.
    You want the CIA to have "police" capabilities in Europe? Let me work through this... By police I mean they can bust down your door and legally haul you away. The US would like the "opportunity" to submit justice on their own terms. If that crime is committed against it's people on it's soil. Given the severe bias against the US, why would I (as one of it's citizens) expect authorities in Belgium or Paris or Germany to treat a trial with the same seriousness or in the same light? Especially when US law is foreign to them and the cultural differences of each society are similar yet very different? For instance, we hold very different legal views of when and where international interdiction is appropriate. I just don't see how such a mechanism can work outside of a very few circumstances in which the political climate of all ICC countries is aligned.

    The extreme opposing viewpoint of European politics and EU governmental outcries toward US foreign policy does make an acceptance of an international court difficult. We could become their next target very easily? Sounds far fetched, look at the daily newspapers around the globe. I would like to see the perpetrators of violence in the Sudan brought before the ICC and tried, which brings me back to my first point. Whos going to go arrest the war lords when they tell Belgium and the EU to FO? That is what I meant by police and Interpol the CIA and MI5 wont do jack. And who will decide what is a correct use of that police action? Especially when the ICC and the US may have a different perspective of how to fight? That seems to be where the US and the ICC don't see eye to eye, in fact based on what I understand, our own soldiers would at time be in violation of that court. Even though they die needlessly to protect the integrity of the Geneva Convention and like minded articles of "war". The very existence of that article is the very question of who should go after those in the Sudan, which is where our support would apparently be needed? All the while our own personal efforts go unaided at present. Where like the Sudan, a few individuals commit mass atrocities in the name of power. Seems to me the ICC wants us to be their foot soldiers.

    Then again perhaps its nothing to do with the ICC at all, but political strife across the board. The EU and Security Councils lack of support and outrage over Iraq, the lack of support from NATO and a host of other issues that play into the hand? We hate you on everything else, but hey come support the ICC wont you?

    Heck let's settle the whole affair and hold all international court proceedings in Texas.
    West of House
    You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
    There is a small mailbox here.

  8. #8
    Regal Making Handler
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,668
    As far as I am aware MI5 has no remit to work out side of the UK, however, their existance has only been acknowledged in the last decade, AFIAK. So who knows what they get upto. The CIA is tasked with gathering inteligance on a global scale, interpole is a global police agency. There is a clear demarkation of roles.
    What happens if a big asteroid hits the Earth? Judging from realistic simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we can assume it will be pretty bad. - Dave Barry

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •