Immediate Israeli govt. response to ICC warrant application ; ‘this is what the new anti-semitism looks like’
Just fuck off with that shit. It’s beyond old now.
7 Likes
5 Likes
https://x.com/sentomcotton/status/1792563525115584612?s=46&t=wYI1UQq4Zm7qgLRSA8YMdw
I think it’s one of those instances US politicians are playing to their domestic audience,oblivious to the damage it does to it’s international reputation.
Really dislike the current US politics of not just disagreeing with international organisations but threatening funding, staff etc
It’s one thing to subtly influence other nations and organisations. It’s another to go after organisations and people who are meant to be independent.
What next ?? Maybe threaten the judges ?
2 Likes
It is Tom Cotton, after all.
1 Like
I would expect, but I havent see the indictment, Hamas are charged with offences under int law, precisely the Rome Statute. That they dont have Statehood might seem incongruous to many on here, but its about the “act”, not the standing. Non state actors can be convicted of war crimes and were extensively so in the Rwanda tribunals, now 30yrs ago. No domestic State has such internal laws and so it can only be done this way.
2 Likes
Problem is it’s not just one on the fringe
https://x.com/afpost/status/1787546839862104423?s=46&t=wYI1UQq4Zm7qgLRSA8YMdw
https://x.com/ambjohnbolton/status/1792522592034738502?s=46&t=wYI1UQq4Zm7qgLRSA8YMdw
https://x.com/sprinterfactory/status/1792615309481848939?s=46&t=wYI1UQq4Zm7qgLRSA8YMdw
Even Bidens statements are concerning and lack respect. Falsely trying to show equivalence (a false argument) Rather than rule of law.
https://x.com/jjz1600/status/1792740879943278855?s=46&t=wYI1UQq4Zm7qgLRSA8YMdw
2 Likes
And for the three top Hamas leaders as well. Well done. 
Hopefully the ICC judges will confirm this, fingers crossed.
3 Likes
It’s at least nice to see countries like Australia and Germany quietly step back Homer-in-the-Hedge style from the nutcases In the US.
To see Biden play politics with genocide is absolutely appalling.
6 Likes
He really has been all over the place since this began. He made a rod for his own back when he rushed to Israel in the immediate atfermath of Oct 7 and gave such an open ended commitment.
His threat to withold arms came too late to make any material difference , although it’s still significant , and was an obvious sop to try and blunt the anger at home that has the potential to really hurt him in November. In trying to please everyone he’s done precisely the opposite , alienating both the pro-Israel and Palestinian camps.
4 Likes
Or just anti-war crimes? You don’t need to be pro anything to be against the reckless killing 35,000 innocent Palestinians (of which 24,000 were women and children ) and 1,400 innocent Israelis.
The USA and allies, including media like the BBC have been allowed to paint anyone who has marched against war crimes simply as pro-Palestine. Sure many or most do support Palestine but I’m sure the reason they are marching is the tens of thousands of deaths from bombing of innocents in internationally recognized safe zones.
4 Likes
Sport on. Being against war crimes and the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians should not be viewed through the lens of being “pro” one side or the other in a conflict. At its core, it’s about upholding basic human rights and the rules of war (post WW2) enshrined in international law.
Our societal values are founded on the rule of law and an independent judicial system free from political interference. Holding all parties accountable to these legal and ethical norms, regardless of nationality or allegiance. It does not matter if they are allies or enemies.
Those are our supposed democratic values, the notion of an eye for an eye, or telling ICC go after them and we will go after you. Is at its heart is barbaric. It makes a mockery of the west trying to spread its values.
To be honest, I find it really disappointing for leaders in the west. I would liken it to a mob boss threatening a judge, or endorsing an attack on a family because they have been wronged. While also supplying the guns.
Only through being objective, can nations have a credible role in ensuring peace.
6 Likes
Israel is in a position right now when they export more weapons and related tech. They probably would need volumes etc especially for ammo. But end of , the threat won’t make any difference. It wouldn’t have made a difference before and certainly won’t make the difference now.
The existing system is shit.
The rationale that US (or China or Russia for that matter) can impose their will on the collective world population is shit. Reforms are the order of the day but the existing Cabal at the UNSC won’t allow it. Self appointed pieces of self serving scum.
This is all spot on, but one thing. USA are not, and I know the sheer duplicity, subscribed to the ICC!!!
Its by assent. Russia are not parties either, in fact, it seems the larger international political military clout the less likely to be ascribed to the ICC.
Its aspects like this which induce critics to claim international law is not law, or at least, law in the sense I guess most people would understand on here. At root its all contractual, excepting the Rome Statute. So US might have to accept the Rome Statute but then they decline the ICC.
2 Likes
Doesn’t matter whether the countries doing that are democratic , communist or whatever.
Might makes Right. To the Victor belongs the spoils. We’re just normal plebs discussing as what people would have done in closed circles before. But the point is that we don’t matter.
It’s all a whole lot of shit. US wants to be in the position where they want to dictate what’s happening , manufacture outrage when it’s needed… and still avoid any blowback to their actions.
Russia and China aren’t in a position right now to effect the discourse amongst the population. They do try to do so but are noticeably failing. But even if they fail , it doesn’t matter one bit.
I agree with everything you said.
Just want to shed light on the eye for an eye aspect.
In the modern day it very much does seem barbaric, but this provision, within primitive Judaism, was actually a restraining mechanism, designed to prevent a disproportionate response. They killed one of your sons? We will kill the whole village… that sort of thing.
Instead, the idea is that vengeance will be satiated with an eye for an eye, and we will leave it at that.
Granted, I know it all sounds like an idea from another time, but let’s apply it to the situation in hand.
Imagine if Israel were able to go by one of the tenets of their faith and apply this? An eye for an eye. Ok, Hamas enacted a terrible crime on October 7. Let’s imagine a swift response, but a restrained response… we will take 1200 of yours because you took 1200 of ours.
I get it. Gandhi would be appalled, Jesus would be appalled, but I strongly suspect that had Israel restrained itself thusly, the whole world would have viewed it as reasonable enough, and we certainly wouldn’t be anywhere near the position we are in now.
1 Like
I’ve got this @cynicaloldgit:
Religion, in all its forms, is BULL. SHIT.
1 Like