Political Rant.
2002-Jul-04, Thursday 17:02So.
The US is mucking about trying to exempt its peacekeepers from prosecution by the International Criminal Court.
Of course, to be prosecuted, you need to be accused, and then the country where the crime is alleged to be committed and the country of origin of the accusee need to ignore the accusation, before the ICC gets to step in. So. In order for US peacekeepers to be prosecuted by the ICC, they need to commit a war crime, be accused of it, the US needs to ignore the accusation, and then the ICC prosecutes. Hrm. Once upon a time, I would have viewed that as... an unlikely chain of events. Currently? No. I think it's entirely likely, and entirely possible, which is why the US is trying to protect itself against it. The US fundamentally does not give a shit about the rest of the world, and this demonstrates it, yet again. The US wants to send its troops anywhere, let them do anything (including commit warcrimes), and be immune to prosecution. Fuckheads.
The US is mucking about trying to exempt its peacekeepers from prosecution by the International Criminal Court.
Of course, to be prosecuted, you need to be accused, and then the country where the crime is alleged to be committed and the country of origin of the accusee need to ignore the accusation, before the ICC gets to step in. So. In order for US peacekeepers to be prosecuted by the ICC, they need to commit a war crime, be accused of it, the US needs to ignore the accusation, and then the ICC prosecutes. Hrm. Once upon a time, I would have viewed that as... an unlikely chain of events. Currently? No. I think it's entirely likely, and entirely possible, which is why the US is trying to protect itself against it. The US fundamentally does not give a shit about the rest of the world, and this demonstrates it, yet again. The US wants to send its troops anywhere, let them do anything (including commit warcrimes), and be immune to prosecution. Fuckheads.