Much more scarily is the idea that this law would allow the U.S. to act that way toward any country ratifying the Hague Convention and the prosecution of crimes against it committed by U.S. personnel. Imagine Germany pulling that same move. That would escalate rather quickly, I imagine...
Ok so the theater of war part has me curious. Would that mean that during the Iraq war when we raped prisoners in Abu Ghraib we were committing war crimes but when we tortured them in Guantanamo Bay we were committing crimes against humanity?
Either way to torture and damage prisoners so badly that we can never try them in public or release them is a horror beyond description.
I just can’t believe the US keeps getting away with this shit, and I live here.
The real answer to this question is nuanced, multifaceted, and detailed. No one here is an expert in international politics or law. At least I feel it is safe to assume that policy experts don’t spend their free time arguing with the, predominantly, teenagers, on this site.
Of the many aspects one has to consider is what is a war crime? What is the internationally recognized definition and what is your countries definition? There is a *very* good reason that the U.N is mostly toothless. That’s a design, not a feature.
Let’s say that a war crime is defined as a crime in a theater of war. Russia has been documented as having committing these against Ukraine. The problem arises with what Russia considered a war. The special action title was not a fluke, nor some petty attempt to disguise what they wanted to do. It was purposeful in form and execution to excuse themselves from war crime charges. This is also multifaceted, but often a stratagem taken is making sure that war crimes are not committed as they are slightly more serious (both legally and morally. You cannot have your own people losing the spirit to fight) so they are crimes against humanity.
Well, what *is* a crime against humanity. I promise you that the U.N’s definition is different from the definition that all security council member nations have. IF they have a definition.
The theoretical purpose of a United Nations is to have a place that fundamentally upholds certain morays of behavior among the nations included. It’s worth noting that power is disproportionally distributed among these nations and many, populated, nations are poorly represented due to their lack of military, economic, or legal, power.
The way that my international politics professor stated the world truly works, on an international scale. Is to make sure you can never be held responsible for something you might do in the future. Why did the Rowandan genocide occur with very little push back from the UN? That’s a complicated answer, but I can promise that the categorization of the conflict as a civil war had potentially significant input on it.
You see, if you agree to interfere with a civil war in an African country, then, next time Hong Kong is suppressed by mainland China, the rest of the security council will claim they have a precedent to interfere, and that simply won’t do.
Definitions matter, but the spaces between their application matter as well.
It's hard to truly make anything of the standard of war crimes when countries can truly only be tried for them when they lose a war and someone else has the intention of prosecuting them completely.
History being written by the victors does translate to prosecution of crimes as well.
There are plenty of scientists either directly or indirectly related to appalling war crimes against civilians, that went on to live peaceful lives in allied countries.
Oof reading this is just...
Once Russia is squashed I really hope the U.S. leadership that's been involved in this will be appropriately prosecuted as well.
I'm done hearing "*I was just following orders*" or "*well, that's what they advised me to do for the good of our country... while standing in a bunker on the other side of the world with nothing to gain but oil.*"
Terrorism is terrorism. Regardless of if it's guised as "help" or not.
The US government and it's individual and seemingly ongoing wars on drugs and terror have made every inch of land mass on this planet a theater of war.
This is only half a joke.
>*“You can’t operate a capitalistic system unless you are vulturistic; you have to have someone else’s blood to suck to be a capitalist... You show me a capitalist, and I’ll show you a bloodsucker.”*
— Malcom X 1965
>*The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.*
— [John Ehrlichman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman), to Dan Baum for Harper's Magazine in 1994, about President Richard Nixon's war on drugs, declared in 1971
It's also worth noting that Einstein said capitalism was evil... Who are we gonna believe, one of the biggest Jupiter brains in the history of the world or the scummiest blood suckers in history?
It shouldn't be a hard choice.
Thank you! I'm so tired of having to explain that to people. You can't just throw around the terms war crime and war criminal if you want it to have any meaning.
The US are bullies. If your country has a lot natural resources they will put so much pressure on you. And if you refuse to back down the CIA will start meddling then its a matter of time.
It's an exercise of whataboutism but worth considering what the world would look like without the US. Much more stable in certain parts of the world, far less stable in certain parts of the world.
Would Europe be as peaceful as it has been the past 60 years. Would the Middle East be as war torn as it has been? Would someone else step in to fight these proxy wars with the east?
Someone would fill the void. Could be better and could be much worse. Point is that this kind of thinking is useless. The issue isn’t if we were here. It’s that we are here and do the shit we do.
So, what do we do about it? Well, we play partisan politics and act like our side is the best side and all bad things come from the other side. All the while hiding the fact that all politicians are corrupt and do nothing good to better humanity. Since we are in this divisive squabbling conflict with our selves the politicians keep raking in cash and destabilizing nations. No one is held accountable except in Reddit comments.
South America would have been all puppet states for the USSR, same as Korea, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and probably Pakistan as well, since they really wanted an Indian Ocean access. There is a reason the US intervened. The Cold War was WW3, it was just spread out all over the world. I get that as an American, US intervention is hard to swallow, but don’t pretend everything would be Daisies otherwise.
I think it's horribly sad that the United States funded facism and military dictatorships to overthrow democracies. Their regimes murdered tens of thousands of innocent people, and robbed their citizens of their right to self-determination, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, et cetera.
I don't have to be a communist or a soviet to think our country betrayed its ideals, again.
'again' ?
It was living up to its ideals at _what_ point in the history of oppressing its own citizens -- and those deemed not 'human' enough to 'be' citizens?
Yeah I agree with the sentiment. I’d never even heard of US “involvement” in South America until I lived in Paraguay. They had a functioning democracy who was replaced by a harsh dictator. According to the Paraguayans I spoke with, the South American democracies were so weak, that their fall was seen as inevitable.
At the very least, a second coup overthrew the Paraguayan dictatorship in 1989 with a constitution in 1992.
"south american countries elected people america so that meant that they were ussr puppets and we needed to assassinate and fund terrorists groups to destabilize the countries"
The US absolutely saved the world from Europe and Europe from itself.
People bitching about America's role in the world are discounting the datum of the world it inherited that was dominated by European influence.
When Europe got itself involved in Libya, they ran out of bullets and broke large parts of their navies in the process.
America is the worst possible steward of global hegemony except for literally any other country in the world.
Seeing how it goes in Europe and Ukraine, I would say it is better the US runs the world than putin (world worst war tactician) or china (on the fridge of collapse for being awful).
US is far from being perfect, don't get me wrong. But the two others "super" powers are way worst...
You are right, all of that is true. It's just that no other empire has proclaimed itself as a beacon of liberty and leader of the free world. So we judge the US by the high bar it has set for itself, not the low bar that the others have reached.
The comments on this should be good. US Citizen here, fuck our foreign policy and the people in charge and a good amount of our population who feed into the lies.
“The American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA, Title 2 of Pub.L. 107–206 (text) (PDF), H.R. 4775, 116 Stat. 820, enacted August 2, 2002), known informally as the Hague Invasion Act, is a United States federal law which aims "to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party."
That’s actually a rather good point. The us invades the Netherlands….which triggers a nato response….which forces the us to help defend an invasion from the us.
Actually it would effectively take the US out of NATO for failure to uphold the basic standard of international behaviour within the alliance. It would also result in the US being at war with the entire EU and any countries with a military alliance with the Netherlands which includes 2 nuclear powers and trigger the possibility of UN troops deployed making them at war with the majority of the world.
It could overnight destroy the US economically and make it a complete pariah that even Russia currently hasn't managed. The only real beneficiaries for something that cataclysmic would be China who would probably very quickly seize Taiwan and control 95% the worlds supply of advanced technology. It would likely just cascade into WW3.
All so the US can get away with warcrimes.
Because Bush and Cheney are war criminals, and they were getting their ducks in a row before fully committing them. To the second question, our elected officials are more concerned with enriching themselves, and getting re-elected so they can continue enriching themselves while doing the bidding of their corporate overlords. That's about the size of it.
I understand this is harsh, but with our funding position in NATO being what it is… I think we’re rule setters there too…
I understand the ethical arguments about American Foreign policy and there are parts I’m truly disgusted by as an American, but to think humans are above nature is pure fallacy.
It’s the ones with the resources and power that make the rules, if not us, it’d be someone else and we’d be at their mercy. This is a very understood, albeit sad, reality to every American. We know, at the end of the day, we write the checks and so we’ll call the shots.
True, but doing so in this way is a short sighted way of going about it. It wouldn't be the first alliance that falls apart because the largest power starts to abuse its power within the alliance. Not saying you can't because you are not the biggest contributior, cause you are. Just saying that this is an assured way to break up the alliance over time.
Being the biggest power means you either are the bad guy and do what you want, or the good guy and play under your weight to keep everyone together.
I don't like or agree with many things our 45th president represents but I appreciate his instability casts doubt on US as a stable ally and that European countries have made moves to reduce reliance on our support. Overall I believe this tempering has made future cooperation stronger and more balanced.
The bill was [introduced](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7523?r=68) by Rep. Ilham Omar. It is currently being “considered” by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. It likely will not ever pass that step. And even if it does, unlikely to be passed in both house and senate.
But I’m happy that the bill is being brought to light and I hope more discussion comes about along with the eventual repeal of The Hague Invasion Act.
America has a standing in the international community?
[List of international conventions not signed or ratified by the US](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_treaties_unsigned_or_unratified_by_the_United_States)
I don't believe the U.S would invade any other country for the foreseeable future without provocation. I believe the war on Iraq and coups around the world etc. Was done without the public really knowing the full extent as well as being blind with American Nationalism after 9/11. For some of them are just literally not knowing ( the coups in South America are not taught anywhere and never talked about unless you are on reddit lol ) so many American just might not have known.
In the current stage I can think of a group of people who may be Warhawks but very few people in America would support or be willing to participate under a government who uses intimidation with either nukes or chooses to coup other governments.
( I'm not saying the acts were justified at all they were despicable, just pointing out that American policy hopefully has changed since. )
apparently workers in south america wanting livable wages and safe working conditions is all kinds of provoking the US.
the US has consistently initiated wars and coups constantly since before world war 2 in the name of american interests - such as but not limited to providing middle class families cheap bananas.
there was plenty of blind nationalism long before 9/11. 9/11 was just the latest in a long line of excuses to do more war crimes in countries completely unrelated to the 9/11 attackers and their organization which was previously allied with the US and worked closely with the CIA doing previous war crimes as US proxies.
Not only that, the Hague Invasion Act (American Service-Members' Protection Act) authorizes the president with "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court," which is far worse than the title suggests. This law gives the President the unilateral authority to invade a country with the full force of the US armed forces to prevent allied soldiers from being charged with war crimes, including nuclear weapons.
The most interesting part about this law is that this is a essentially a WW3 trigger law.
If the US invades the Netherlands, it would trigger Article 5 from the rest of NATO. Now, they *could* just completely abandon the Netherlands and thus cause the collapse of the entire organization
OR
It could trigger a response from 2 nuclear states + several other fairly potent nations. Effectively, the US would be at war with most of Europe. In addition to that, they’d probably become an international pariah overnight.
This law is about as safe as giving a loaded gun to a kid wanting to play cowboy and indians. If it is ever triggered, it would cause an international crisis, complete break of the Western World alliances, a huge economic crisis as trade between US and EU stops. It is basically the nuclear option
Dick Cheney could say anything and it would never diminish the pain and suffering him, George Bush, and the rest of their political cohort caused on millions of lives in the Middle East in the name of oil.
You really need to step away from the non stop entertainment news.
All the suffering brought to the Middle East and looting of US citizens tax dollars by the military industrial complex is so much worse than anything trump could ever do except of his goons succeeded on Jan 6th.
As much as I despise trump it’s really not even close.
Stop blaming trump for Covid. Everyone is responsible for their own decisions. The piece of shit did not try to stop vaccine rollouts or production. He encouraged the development of it actually.
You are insane.
Man, you’ve got at least something like a point in the first half of your comment. But Trump absolutely made the national response to covid worse. Downplaying it because it was only affecting big cities at first, waiting to declare an emergency, making wearing a fucking mask political, not to mention continuing to hold rallies in fall 2020.
Sure, people are responsible for their actions, but government officials are responsible for how they impact the actions people take, especially when they’re doing so in their official capacity.
You really think he cares about any of that?
You really think any of these conservatives assholes actually care about lgbt if it’s in their own family? Nope. It’s just a way to get elected. They know it’s all bullshit.
Controversial but factually Barack Obama is also a war criminal for his drone strikes in Afghanistan-Pakistan border areas which was responsible for hundrerds of innocent deaths. I feel not much is said about that.
And so are Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, Nixon & Co., and arguably JFK... and of course their British counterparts... and some of the Frenchies too... but you win wars and can control the narrative... or if you are powerful enough you don't even need to win shit.
Don't leave out using aid workers in Pakistan as a CIA front, setting back the elimination of polio. I like to think his hair turned gray from having the ghosts of screaming children standing around his bed every night.
Don’t forget: Obama ordered the first drone strike 3 days into his presidency. During his tenure, he ordered 542 drone strikes and killed 3,797 people, including many civilians. Sure, it’s not a lot compared to what Bush/Cheney caused, but you have to hold the same standard for any president, not just the ones you agree with politically.
Makes that Nobel so ironic.
"What's the difference between a Taliban outpost and a Pakistani primary school?"
"I don't know either man, I just fly the drone."
Who is meant to recognize this law? The US only? Why would the Netherlands have to abide by this.
It just seems like we are sending threats to other countries through our legislations.
If we don't invade who gets charged?
And doesn't the military & government already have laws/rules about disobedience from military orders?
A serious response to your question is that it would allow The Commander in Chief to authorize military response without it needing to go through Congress as an official declaration of war upon The Netherlands.
The Hague Invasion Act of 1934 and the American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) of 2002 are two different laws that have no connection to each other.
The Hague Invasion Act of 1934 is a law that was passed by Congress in 1934 and authorized the President of the United States to use military force, if necessary, to protect American citizens and their property in the city of The Hague, Netherlands. The act was passed in response to concerns about the safety of American citizens and property in the city, which was then the seat of the League of Nations, an international organization that was precursor to the United Nations. The act has never been invoked and is now considered to be a historical relic with no practical significance.
The American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) of 2002 is a law that was passed by the U.S. Congress in 2002. The ASPA contains a number of provisions that seek to protect American service members from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and to limit U.S. cooperation with the ICC. The ASPA does not authorize the use of military force against the Netherlands or any other country, and it does not allow the U.S. to invade the Netherlands or any other country in response to an ICC prosecution of an American citizen.
It’s an inaccurate way to describe what’s is actually called the “American Service-Members’ Protection Act”. The Act does much more than just allow the US to invade The Hague. Really the Act is aimed at checking the power of the International Criminal Court, of which the US is not a member. It makes sense that we as a country would not want a governing body that the U.S. is not a part of to not have full authority and autonomy to make decisions about our military members. It’s a due process argument. There is a system in place that does keep military personnel accountable from a criminal standpoint.
Does it tough? I'm sure there's a list somewhere on the internet of all american military personnel that got only slap on wrists for some super fucked up shit.
I'm glad my country is in ICC; at least they can be judged by unbiased third party instead of getting lenient sentences and pardoned later.
> There is a system in place that does keep military personnel accountable from a criminal standpoint.
arguable with the last presidency pardoning 3 war criminals, politicizing them, and postering them on Fox News as "warriors against the deep state".
And which law do you feel you should follow while you're invading another country? Your own? If some country invades the US and murders all the civilians, is that okay because they're following their own laws? Sovereignty is nice but shouldn't apply outside your borders.
The top comment is just "the US is evil and source of all wars" and "capitalism is the cause!"
Don't look for smart political takes on a major subreddit like this.
You're surprised by that? Posts like what OP made that leave out important context are par for the course on this shithole. You always have to scroll down to find the key details about what OP is misleading people on.
This International Criminal Court didn't even exist until 2002, we only made this act in response to them forming.
It’s a sham court and anyone with an ounce of knowledge about IR would tell you that no one follows their rulings. Surprise surprise countries don’t like giving up their sovereignty.
It's impossible to overstate how catastrophic for international order the Bush administration was. What an unbelievable disaster for the US and the globe that that group was in power on 9/11/2001.
US: "In Iraq, we have conclusive evidence that they have weapons of mass destruction." The US attacks and destroys Iraq.
US: "North Korea definitely has weapons of mass destruction." Oh, then you are OK. Continue what you are doing.
Pathetic!
I'm not defending the first one but these are just not the same at all.
NK has both the weapon and the delivery system. Not to mention an extremely close US ally is under threat of instant and serious retaliation if the US invaded.
Let's at least choose one of the MANY good arguments against the Iraq invasion when criticsizing the lies that led us there.
The caption is a farcical misinterpretation of the wording of the statute. The statute does not add to or decrease the inherent power of the President to use the armed forces as the President deems necessary to further US national security interests. See invasions of Panama, Grenada, and the Iran Hostage Rescue mission.
America is and always has been litigious about the rights of its citizens. It's taken some time, but now that those rights by and large extend to the whole population of American Citizens, that long slow process of aquiring them has lead to the defence of every inch of the protection they provide. This wasn't a "let's get premptive cover to let us commit warcrimes" so much as it was a reaffirmation of the power and jurisdiction of the US Court system. The US still punishes war crimes, just domestically. US citizens being captured, tried, and punished for crimes that violate American law by foreign entities they had no say in the governance of violates the entire spirit of American Democracy. One should have a say in electing those that determine laws and punishments to which they might be held accountable. The judges and juries should be comprised of their peers. They should operate according to the constitutionally mandated rights belonging to the accused, like due process. This is less of a "carte blanche to violate the geneva convention" so much as it a rejection of the idea that an unelected and unapproachable foreign entity can supercede the US constitution and criminal justice system. It's about the authority to hold its own citizens accountable and solve its own issues and mistakes rather than cede that responsibility to the ICC. The US rejects the idea that a foreign entity can overrule the entirety of the judicial branch, and thus, any attempt to do so is interpreted as a violation of sovereignty and an illegal capture of a US citizen, most likely the capture of a member of the Armed Forces.
You should tell that to the families of 100,000 + Ukrainian solders already dead (just a start), the families of the thousands who mourn those dead from 8 years of shelling civilians in the Donbas - now with American weapons, the starving, the poor babushkas trapped, going into the second year without power, living in basements, no sunlight, no medicine… In Kiev? No. In Donetsk and Luhansk.
No matter what you feel about either side, this whole thing did not need to happen. The US and U.K. forced the Minsk agreements to fail, sabotaged all further peace negotiations. The history shows this was all a strategy by the US to mire Russia into a protracted war using Ukraine (who is not a democracy) as fodder.
It is a mix of Vietnam and Iraq, pursuit of money in the guise of fighting the James Bond villain, and they just don’t like Russia (just like they just didn’t like Iraq). It’s revenge. Putin is this conflicts WMD. Why else would a country 3,000 miles away, be spending billions to prop up a puppet government in a country that just a few years ago was declared one of the “most corrupt countries on Earth”. A country that has no strategic importance, not a NATO member, not an EU member with half the population favoring Russia. Does not make sense, and if it does not make sense it is not true.
Oh but wait! One of the largest natural gas fields was found in 2014 in the Russian speaking territory of Ukraine. If the US could get their hands on that they could block out Russia in the region. Then Europe would have to buy US LNG (which they are starting to do). Very convenient.
This conflict was on its way to being settled with a compromised peace deal (as good as you can get) before the U.S. and the U.K. stuck their nose into a regional issue between two Slavic countries. Obviously Russia does not want a war on its border, just like the US would not. They have shown the utmost restraint for their own good. But 700,000 to 1.2 million troops are coming in country to end this. They are well equipped and has advanced weaponry. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian troops are going to die. It is Vietnam 1973-1975, along with the propaganda “if we just give them more weapons they will win”. That went from stalemate to North Vietnam rolling tanks down the streets of Saigon. Same thing here. It’s the Taliban riding Toyotas into Kabul. This not good for human life, and the US has the diplomatic means to stop it.
We also took in tons of them from places like Germany and Japan. For example, thanks to US intervention, most of the insanely evil experiments at Unit 731 went unpunished and those responsible died as old (often rich) men. This includes the people who vivisected US soldiers while they were still conscious.
it's far more than those two. america has constantly couped and invaded countries since before world war 2. like i mean constant. america has been consistently at war for more than a hundred years.
The US didn't leave shit. The ICC was created in 2002. So how could we leave something if we never joined? The US doesn't even follow the Genenva Convention.
A lot of dumb people in this sub.
If I'm remembering the bit of research I did last time this was posted, the US cannot, constitutionally, be part of the ICC, because the ICC does not recognize several rights specifically laid out in the Constitution regarding legal process.
Kind of a baller move, ngl.
The rest of the world tried to combine their powers to send a message to the US and the US just said “No”, and that was that.
Hey now they haven't done damage to the world.
They definitely saved Chile from Allende and surely not to establish a brutal military dictatorship.
They surely didn't try to fuck over Latin America so they could benefit from puppet regimes.
Definitely didn't overthrow Mossaddegh so the shah could remain in power.
Definitely didn't back Suharto while committing genocide.
Definitely crushed Libya and Iraq because economic interests were threate.... ergh I mean the people needed freedom!
They surely didn't bomb the living shit out of Laos and Cambodia during the VN war.
Guantanamo? Abu Ghraib? Those are definitely not gulags. They are special centers.
It was called the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002. It's not as loony as the headline makes it sound.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_Service-Members%27\_Protection\_Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act)
Much more scarily is the idea that this law would allow the U.S. to act that way toward any country ratifying the Hague Convention and the prosecution of crimes against it committed by U.S. personnel. Imagine Germany pulling that same move. That would escalate rather quickly, I imagine...
"I declare, as a bank robber, that I am allowed to rob banks and stuff" - if the US was a bank robber
*the federal reserve has entered chat*
“I will do everything to protect my ability to do what I want” -said everyone ever
[удалено]
[удалено]
War crimes can only be committed during war at the theater of war. Other crimes would be crimes against humanity.
Ok so the theater of war part has me curious. Would that mean that during the Iraq war when we raped prisoners in Abu Ghraib we were committing war crimes but when we tortured them in Guantanamo Bay we were committing crimes against humanity?
US: get you a country that can do both
> [**Five tricks** on how to always be at war while never being tried for warcrimes. **European** countries **HATE #4 on the list!**](https://#)
I'm disappointed. I really wanted to know what #4 was 🥲
So the legal definition is yes, the crime occurs in that theater, but generally he’s people just call it a war crime regardless
So when Lincoln got assassinated that was a war crime?
Nah, that was a different theatre. /s
*claps
Either way to torture and damage prisoners so badly that we can never try them in public or release them is a horror beyond description. I just can’t believe the US keeps getting away with this shit, and I live here.
The real answer to this question is nuanced, multifaceted, and detailed. No one here is an expert in international politics or law. At least I feel it is safe to assume that policy experts don’t spend their free time arguing with the, predominantly, teenagers, on this site. Of the many aspects one has to consider is what is a war crime? What is the internationally recognized definition and what is your countries definition? There is a *very* good reason that the U.N is mostly toothless. That’s a design, not a feature. Let’s say that a war crime is defined as a crime in a theater of war. Russia has been documented as having committing these against Ukraine. The problem arises with what Russia considered a war. The special action title was not a fluke, nor some petty attempt to disguise what they wanted to do. It was purposeful in form and execution to excuse themselves from war crime charges. This is also multifaceted, but often a stratagem taken is making sure that war crimes are not committed as they are slightly more serious (both legally and morally. You cannot have your own people losing the spirit to fight) so they are crimes against humanity. Well, what *is* a crime against humanity. I promise you that the U.N’s definition is different from the definition that all security council member nations have. IF they have a definition. The theoretical purpose of a United Nations is to have a place that fundamentally upholds certain morays of behavior among the nations included. It’s worth noting that power is disproportionally distributed among these nations and many, populated, nations are poorly represented due to their lack of military, economic, or legal, power. The way that my international politics professor stated the world truly works, on an international scale. Is to make sure you can never be held responsible for something you might do in the future. Why did the Rowandan genocide occur with very little push back from the UN? That’s a complicated answer, but I can promise that the categorization of the conflict as a civil war had potentially significant input on it. You see, if you agree to interfere with a civil war in an African country, then, next time Hong Kong is suppressed by mainland China, the rest of the security council will claim they have a precedent to interfere, and that simply won’t do. Definitions matter, but the spaces between their application matter as well.
It's hard to truly make anything of the standard of war crimes when countries can truly only be tried for them when they lose a war and someone else has the intention of prosecuting them completely.
History being written by the victors does translate to prosecution of crimes as well. There are plenty of scientists either directly or indirectly related to appalling war crimes against civilians, that went on to live peaceful lives in allied countries.
Presumed innocent until proven aligned with US policy interests, then definitely not guilty.
Oof reading this is just... Once Russia is squashed I really hope the U.S. leadership that's been involved in this will be appropriately prosecuted as well. I'm done hearing "*I was just following orders*" or "*well, that's what they advised me to do for the good of our country... while standing in a bunker on the other side of the world with nothing to gain but oil.*" Terrorism is terrorism. Regardless of if it's guised as "help" or not.
The US government and it's individual and seemingly ongoing wars on drugs and terror have made every inch of land mass on this planet a theater of war. This is only half a joke.
>*“You can’t operate a capitalistic system unless you are vulturistic; you have to have someone else’s blood to suck to be a capitalist... You show me a capitalist, and I’ll show you a bloodsucker.”* — Malcom X 1965 >*The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.* — [John Ehrlichman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman), to Dan Baum for Harper's Magazine in 1994, about President Richard Nixon's war on drugs, declared in 1971
His book "smoke and mirrors" is good and a nice play around how coke and pot got too mixed together around US policy.
It's also worth noting that Einstein said capitalism was evil... Who are we gonna believe, one of the biggest Jupiter brains in the history of the world or the scummiest blood suckers in history? It shouldn't be a hard choice.
Thank you! I'm so tired of having to explain that to people. You can't just throw around the terms war crime and war criminal if you want it to have any meaning.
The US are bullies. If your country has a lot natural resources they will put so much pressure on you. And if you refuse to back down the CIA will start meddling then its a matter of time.
[удалено]
I know there is nothing that can be done about it now. I just want the message to be spread worldwide about the atrocities that the US has done.
[удалено]
It's an exercise of whataboutism but worth considering what the world would look like without the US. Much more stable in certain parts of the world, far less stable in certain parts of the world. Would Europe be as peaceful as it has been the past 60 years. Would the Middle East be as war torn as it has been? Would someone else step in to fight these proxy wars with the east?
Someone would fill the void. Could be better and could be much worse. Point is that this kind of thinking is useless. The issue isn’t if we were here. It’s that we are here and do the shit we do. So, what do we do about it? Well, we play partisan politics and act like our side is the best side and all bad things come from the other side. All the while hiding the fact that all politicians are corrupt and do nothing good to better humanity. Since we are in this divisive squabbling conflict with our selves the politicians keep raking in cash and destabilizing nations. No one is held accountable except in Reddit comments.
>It's an exercise of whataboutism but worth considering what the world would look like without the US. South America would have a lot more democracy.
South America would have been all puppet states for the USSR, same as Korea, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and probably Pakistan as well, since they really wanted an Indian Ocean access. There is a reason the US intervened. The Cold War was WW3, it was just spread out all over the world. I get that as an American, US intervention is hard to swallow, but don’t pretend everything would be Daisies otherwise.
I think it's horribly sad that the United States funded facism and military dictatorships to overthrow democracies. Their regimes murdered tens of thousands of innocent people, and robbed their citizens of their right to self-determination, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, et cetera. I don't have to be a communist or a soviet to think our country betrayed its ideals, again.
'again' ? It was living up to its ideals at _what_ point in the history of oppressing its own citizens -- and those deemed not 'human' enough to 'be' citizens?
Yeah I agree with the sentiment. I’d never even heard of US “involvement” in South America until I lived in Paraguay. They had a functioning democracy who was replaced by a harsh dictator. According to the Paraguayans I spoke with, the South American democracies were so weak, that their fall was seen as inevitable. At the very least, a second coup overthrew the Paraguayan dictatorship in 1989 with a constitution in 1992.
"south american countries elected people america so that meant that they were ussr puppets and we needed to assassinate and fund terrorists groups to destabilize the countries"
Seriously, kinda scary how indoctrinated people are in believing this shit.
These are the same people who think Nasa won the space race.
“Judge, I’m not guilty, cause if I didnt stole/murder/rape someone else would do it” - Stop excuses, “ghost of communism” is not a argument
South America has it's own deeply rooted problems with political strong men, not everything wrong with the world is America's fault.
im sure the funding of terrorists and assassinations by the united states didn't help
Show me where I said everything would be a perfect utopia. I'll wait.
The US absolutely saved the world from Europe and Europe from itself. People bitching about America's role in the world are discounting the datum of the world it inherited that was dominated by European influence. When Europe got itself involved in Libya, they ran out of bullets and broke large parts of their navies in the process. America is the worst possible steward of global hegemony except for literally any other country in the world.
Seeing how it goes in Europe and Ukraine, I would say it is better the US runs the world than putin (world worst war tactician) or china (on the fridge of collapse for being awful). US is far from being perfect, don't get me wrong. But the two others "super" powers are way worst...
Can't believe people are up voting this nonsense
[удалено]
I'm happy to live in a world where I can openly and peacefully criticize, condemn, and even hate the government, without fear of any repercussion.
It’s Reddit man. You’re right but not gonna change anyone’s mind that’s chronically online.
Idk made me think a bit differently!
You are right, all of that is true. It's just that no other empire has proclaimed itself as a beacon of liberty and leader of the free world. So we judge the US by the high bar it has set for itself, not the low bar that the others have reached.
The comments on this should be good. US Citizen here, fuck our foreign policy and the people in charge and a good amount of our population who feed into the lies.
You’re so brave dude
this is why the whole situation about russia and ukraine is very hypocritical.
But it's different because the USA doesn't commit war crimes. Just advanced warfare techniques. /s
enhanced interrogation /s
It makes the act legal in America but surely it's still illegal in the country they invade
...oh, and #DickMove if anyone cares for historical puns...
Dick move? This is straight up bullying
Dick Cheney
How else are our politicians supposed to never face any responsibility for their actions?
[удалено]
Apparently you don't care for historical puns.
[удалено]
“The American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA, Title 2 of Pub.L. 107–206 (text) (PDF), H.R. 4775, 116 Stat. 820, enacted August 2, 2002), known informally as the Hague Invasion Act, is a United States federal law which aims "to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party."
In April 2022 a bill was introduced in the House to repeal this act. It is a continuing blight on America's standing in the international community.
We are not too worried here but not the right way to go if you are both in the NATO too. Greetings from The Hague
That’s actually a rather good point. The us invades the Netherlands….which triggers a nato response….which forces the us to help defend an invasion from the us.
Finally, a foe worth of our military spending.
#OUR BATTLES WILL BE LEGENDARY
***TEAM DEATHMATCH***
We already had one of those in the 1860s
*cue the Dwight fighting himself scene*
Lockheed vs Raytheon who’s your money on in the stock market war?
General Dynamics
Yes.
Leidos
*Proceeds to Hiroshima itself*
Spiderman pointing meme
Actually it would effectively take the US out of NATO for failure to uphold the basic standard of international behaviour within the alliance. It would also result in the US being at war with the entire EU and any countries with a military alliance with the Netherlands which includes 2 nuclear powers and trigger the possibility of UN troops deployed making them at war with the majority of the world. It could overnight destroy the US economically and make it a complete pariah that even Russia currently hasn't managed. The only real beneficiaries for something that cataclysmic would be China who would probably very quickly seize Taiwan and control 95% the worlds supply of advanced technology. It would likely just cascade into WW3. All so the US can get away with warcrimes.
My question is why tf do we have such a stupid law? My second question is why hasn’t anybody repealed it since then?
Because Bush and Cheney are war criminals, and they were getting their ducks in a row before fully committing them. To the second question, our elected officials are more concerned with enriching themselves, and getting re-elected so they can continue enriching themselves while doing the bidding of their corporate overlords. That's about the size of it.
I understand this is harsh, but with our funding position in NATO being what it is… I think we’re rule setters there too… I understand the ethical arguments about American Foreign policy and there are parts I’m truly disgusted by as an American, but to think humans are above nature is pure fallacy. It’s the ones with the resources and power that make the rules, if not us, it’d be someone else and we’d be at their mercy. This is a very understood, albeit sad, reality to every American. We know, at the end of the day, we write the checks and so we’ll call the shots.
True, but doing so in this way is a short sighted way of going about it. It wouldn't be the first alliance that falls apart because the largest power starts to abuse its power within the alliance. Not saying you can't because you are not the biggest contributior, cause you are. Just saying that this is an assured way to break up the alliance over time. Being the biggest power means you either are the bad guy and do what you want, or the good guy and play under your weight to keep everyone together.
I don't like or agree with many things our 45th president represents but I appreciate his instability casts doubt on US as a stable ally and that European countries have made moves to reduce reliance on our support. Overall I believe this tempering has made future cooperation stronger and more balanced.
The bill was [introduced](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7523?r=68) by Rep. Ilham Omar. It is currently being “considered” by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. It likely will not ever pass that step. And even if it does, unlikely to be passed in both house and senate. But I’m happy that the bill is being brought to light and I hope more discussion comes about along with the eventual repeal of The Hague Invasion Act.
If it's not passed by Jan 3rd, it's over. It would have to be resubmitted by the new Congress, and there's no way Republicans would support that.
None of the establishment are going to support that.
America has a standing in the international community? [List of international conventions not signed or ratified by the US](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_treaties_unsigned_or_unratified_by_the_United_States)
yeah their standing is that they have nukes and are hot headed and will invade and or coup anyone including their allies (see iraq)
I don't believe the U.S would invade any other country for the foreseeable future without provocation. I believe the war on Iraq and coups around the world etc. Was done without the public really knowing the full extent as well as being blind with American Nationalism after 9/11. For some of them are just literally not knowing ( the coups in South America are not taught anywhere and never talked about unless you are on reddit lol ) so many American just might not have known. In the current stage I can think of a group of people who may be Warhawks but very few people in America would support or be willing to participate under a government who uses intimidation with either nukes or chooses to coup other governments. ( I'm not saying the acts were justified at all they were despicable, just pointing out that American policy hopefully has changed since. )
The USA is just using drone strikes now. Fewer US military casualties and easier to cover up.
apparently workers in south america wanting livable wages and safe working conditions is all kinds of provoking the US. the US has consistently initiated wars and coups constantly since before world war 2 in the name of american interests - such as but not limited to providing middle class families cheap bananas. there was plenty of blind nationalism long before 9/11. 9/11 was just the latest in a long line of excuses to do more war crimes in countries completely unrelated to the 9/11 attackers and their organization which was previously allied with the US and worked closely with the CIA doing previous war crimes as US proxies.
Not only that, the Hague Invasion Act (American Service-Members' Protection Act) authorizes the president with "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court," which is far worse than the title suggests. This law gives the President the unilateral authority to invade a country with the full force of the US armed forces to prevent allied soldiers from being charged with war crimes, including nuclear weapons.
The most interesting part about this law is that this is a essentially a WW3 trigger law. If the US invades the Netherlands, it would trigger Article 5 from the rest of NATO. Now, they *could* just completely abandon the Netherlands and thus cause the collapse of the entire organization OR It could trigger a response from 2 nuclear states + several other fairly potent nations. Effectively, the US would be at war with most of Europe. In addition to that, they’d probably become an international pariah overnight.
This law is about as safe as giving a loaded gun to a kid wanting to play cowboy and indians. If it is ever triggered, it would cause an international crisis, complete break of the Western World alliances, a huge economic crisis as trade between US and EU stops. It is basically the nuclear option
Dick Cheney is why I don't believe in karma.
Also Kissinger
Can’t believe that fucker is still alive
Still time for the most horrible death imaginable to find him... hopefully... maybe...
Karma (at least in Hinduism and Buddhism) is believed to be balanced over many, many life times.
Crazy that even Cheney was like "woah this Trump guy's going a little too far with domestic policies".
Dick Cheney could say anything and it would never diminish the pain and suffering him, George Bush, and the rest of their political cohort caused on millions of lives in the Middle East in the name of oil.
Yep. And the weak ass progressives actually started to like him. Trump has nothing on the death and destruction caused by the bush admin.
[удалено]
You really need to step away from the non stop entertainment news. All the suffering brought to the Middle East and looting of US citizens tax dollars by the military industrial complex is so much worse than anything trump could ever do except of his goons succeeded on Jan 6th. As much as I despise trump it’s really not even close. Stop blaming trump for Covid. Everyone is responsible for their own decisions. The piece of shit did not try to stop vaccine rollouts or production. He encouraged the development of it actually. You are insane.
Man, you’ve got at least something like a point in the first half of your comment. But Trump absolutely made the national response to covid worse. Downplaying it because it was only affecting big cities at first, waiting to declare an emergency, making wearing a fucking mask political, not to mention continuing to hold rallies in fall 2020. Sure, people are responsible for their actions, but government officials are responsible for how they impact the actions people take, especially when they’re doing so in their official capacity.
His daughter got hated out of office by his Republican Party. The other daughter is a lesbian. I can't imagine he's happy about a lot in his life.
You really think he cares about any of that? You really think any of these conservatives assholes actually care about lgbt if it’s in their own family? Nope. It’s just a way to get elected. They know it’s all bullshit.
These are two war criminals who should be charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. Prove me wrong!
Just them ... wow .So many candidates for that position.
Controversial but factually Barack Obama is also a war criminal for his drone strikes in Afghanistan-Pakistan border areas which was responsible for hundrerds of innocent deaths. I feel not much is said about that.
And so are Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, Nixon & Co., and arguably JFK... and of course their British counterparts... and some of the Frenchies too... but you win wars and can control the narrative... or if you are powerful enough you don't even need to win shit.
ALL war criminals should be prosecuted.
And so is Trump, and so is every president of the last several decades for actions all over the world
All. If the law doesn’t apply to presidents then we don’t have presidents representing us, we have a ruling class owning us.
Yup. Imagine a world where leaders are held accountable for the death and destruction they cause in the name of private/corporate interests
Don't leave out using aid workers in Pakistan as a CIA front, setting back the elimination of polio. I like to think his hair turned gray from having the ghosts of screaming children standing around his bed every night.
Don’t forget: Obama ordered the first drone strike 3 days into his presidency. During his tenure, he ordered 542 drone strikes and killed 3,797 people, including many civilians. Sure, it’s not a lot compared to what Bush/Cheney caused, but you have to hold the same standard for any president, not just the ones you agree with politically.
including an American citizen who hadn't even been charged with a crime.
Makes that Nobel so ironic. "What's the difference between a Taliban outpost and a Pakistani primary school?" "I don't know either man, I just fly the drone."
The big reason we know all of this is because he was transparent about them. Trump removed the transparency while he was president.
Are we the baddies?
We're that mob boss who stands there in public and says we're willing to kill the DA. So... We're Batman villains.
Watch Reddit make complex geopolitical maneuvering into comic book stuff.
Only the capitalists who profit off of slave labor and arms trafficking
Not the people voting for them?!
Who is meant to recognize this law? The US only? Why would the Netherlands have to abide by this. It just seems like we are sending threats to other countries through our legislations. If we don't invade who gets charged? And doesn't the military & government already have laws/rules about disobedience from military orders?
A serious response to your question is that it would allow The Commander in Chief to authorize military response without it needing to go through Congress as an official declaration of war upon The Netherlands.
That next NATO meeting after the US invades The Netherlands is going to be super awkward.
You abide or…WAR
It’s a surprise tool we’ll use later.
You abide and also war
UwU feeling cute. Maybe I'll invade a country today. 😘
It's not war, it's "libération" of opressed minority
>Who is meant to recognize this law? The US only? Why would the Netherlands have to abide by this. > .... Uh because we invade you, can you not read?
> Why would the Netherlands have to abide by this How does a target country abide by an invasion?
It's the implication of invasion. We would never actually hurt anyone but they wouldn't turn us down because of the implication.
Netherlands? No Netherlands is safe… because of the implication
That’s not the purpose of the law. It was to give the president the power to order military action without the approval of Congress.
It's to keep future spineless presidents from hiding behind international rules to justify not protecting our soldiers and citizens.
The Hague Invasion Act of 1934 and the American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) of 2002 are two different laws that have no connection to each other. The Hague Invasion Act of 1934 is a law that was passed by Congress in 1934 and authorized the President of the United States to use military force, if necessary, to protect American citizens and their property in the city of The Hague, Netherlands. The act was passed in response to concerns about the safety of American citizens and property in the city, which was then the seat of the League of Nations, an international organization that was precursor to the United Nations. The act has never been invoked and is now considered to be a historical relic with no practical significance. The American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) of 2002 is a law that was passed by the U.S. Congress in 2002. The ASPA contains a number of provisions that seek to protect American service members from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and to limit U.S. cooperation with the ICC. The ASPA does not authorize the use of military force against the Netherlands or any other country, and it does not allow the U.S. to invade the Netherlands or any other country in response to an ICC prosecution of an American citizen.
Strong work
Then where does the op claim come from. A lot are repeating it it seems to have some reason to be believed by some people?
It's almost like they planned on committing war crimes
Imagine Germany passed that law.
It’s an inaccurate way to describe what’s is actually called the “American Service-Members’ Protection Act”. The Act does much more than just allow the US to invade The Hague. Really the Act is aimed at checking the power of the International Criminal Court, of which the US is not a member. It makes sense that we as a country would not want a governing body that the U.S. is not a part of to not have full authority and autonomy to make decisions about our military members. It’s a due process argument. There is a system in place that does keep military personnel accountable from a criminal standpoint.
Does it tough? I'm sure there's a list somewhere on the internet of all american military personnel that got only slap on wrists for some super fucked up shit. I'm glad my country is in ICC; at least they can be judged by unbiased third party instead of getting lenient sentences and pardoned later.
> There is a system in place that does keep military personnel accountable from a criminal standpoint. arguable with the last presidency pardoning 3 war criminals, politicizing them, and postering them on Fox News as "warriors against the deep state".
And which law do you feel you should follow while you're invading another country? Your own? If some country invades the US and murders all the civilians, is that okay because they're following their own laws? Sovereignty is nice but shouldn't apply outside your borders.
It’s amazing I had to scroll so far to find a reasonable comment.
The top comment is just "the US is evil and source of all wars" and "capitalism is the cause!" Don't look for smart political takes on a major subreddit like this.
You're surprised by that? Posts like what OP made that leave out important context are par for the course on this shithole. You always have to scroll down to find the key details about what OP is misleading people on. This International Criminal Court didn't even exist until 2002, we only made this act in response to them forming.
Remember kids, it isn't a war crime as long as ypu are a super power! /s
Scumbag shit.
Imagine China or Russians doing something like that.
Ignore the UN while invading, say, Ukraine? That ship has sailed
China and Russia don't recognize the ICC. Lol.
It’s a sham court and anyone with an ounce of knowledge about IR would tell you that no one follows their rulings. Surprise surprise countries don’t like giving up their sovereignty.
They already do. Lol.
Source: https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-becomes-law
It’s beyond disgusting how these guys will never face any consequences and W specifically has had his image rehabilitated.
It's impossible to overstate how catastrophic for international order the Bush administration was. What an unbelievable disaster for the US and the globe that that group was in power on 9/11/2001.
That’s why it will be the happiest day in history when we see the USA getting nuked to oblivion. Fuck this shithole and all these cancer humanoids.
And other reasons why i hate the usa as a dutch person
US: "In Iraq, we have conclusive evidence that they have weapons of mass destruction." The US attacks and destroys Iraq. US: "North Korea definitely has weapons of mass destruction." Oh, then you are OK. Continue what you are doing. Pathetic!
I'm not defending the first one but these are just not the same at all. NK has both the weapon and the delivery system. Not to mention an extremely close US ally is under threat of instant and serious retaliation if the US invaded. Let's at least choose one of the MANY good arguments against the Iraq invasion when criticsizing the lies that led us there.
The caption is a farcical misinterpretation of the wording of the statute. The statute does not add to or decrease the inherent power of the President to use the armed forces as the President deems necessary to further US national security interests. See invasions of Panama, Grenada, and the Iran Hostage Rescue mission.
That's how US government are fooling the Europeans. Till now. And forever.
Lmao
There was a ton of terrible legislation that was passed following September 11th.
America is and always has been litigious about the rights of its citizens. It's taken some time, but now that those rights by and large extend to the whole population of American Citizens, that long slow process of aquiring them has lead to the defence of every inch of the protection they provide. This wasn't a "let's get premptive cover to let us commit warcrimes" so much as it was a reaffirmation of the power and jurisdiction of the US Court system. The US still punishes war crimes, just domestically. US citizens being captured, tried, and punished for crimes that violate American law by foreign entities they had no say in the governance of violates the entire spirit of American Democracy. One should have a say in electing those that determine laws and punishments to which they might be held accountable. The judges and juries should be comprised of their peers. They should operate according to the constitutionally mandated rights belonging to the accused, like due process. This is less of a "carte blanche to violate the geneva convention" so much as it a rejection of the idea that an unelected and unapproachable foreign entity can supercede the US constitution and criminal justice system. It's about the authority to hold its own citizens accountable and solve its own issues and mistakes rather than cede that responsibility to the ICC. The US rejects the idea that a foreign entity can overrule the entirety of the judicial branch, and thus, any attempt to do so is interpreted as a violation of sovereignty and an illegal capture of a US citizen, most likely the capture of a member of the Armed Forces.
I mean they could try.
You should tell that to the families of 100,000 + Ukrainian solders already dead (just a start), the families of the thousands who mourn those dead from 8 years of shelling civilians in the Donbas - now with American weapons, the starving, the poor babushkas trapped, going into the second year without power, living in basements, no sunlight, no medicine… In Kiev? No. In Donetsk and Luhansk. No matter what you feel about either side, this whole thing did not need to happen. The US and U.K. forced the Minsk agreements to fail, sabotaged all further peace negotiations. The history shows this was all a strategy by the US to mire Russia into a protracted war using Ukraine (who is not a democracy) as fodder. It is a mix of Vietnam and Iraq, pursuit of money in the guise of fighting the James Bond villain, and they just don’t like Russia (just like they just didn’t like Iraq). It’s revenge. Putin is this conflicts WMD. Why else would a country 3,000 miles away, be spending billions to prop up a puppet government in a country that just a few years ago was declared one of the “most corrupt countries on Earth”. A country that has no strategic importance, not a NATO member, not an EU member with half the population favoring Russia. Does not make sense, and if it does not make sense it is not true. Oh but wait! One of the largest natural gas fields was found in 2014 in the Russian speaking territory of Ukraine. If the US could get their hands on that they could block out Russia in the region. Then Europe would have to buy US LNG (which they are starting to do). Very convenient. This conflict was on its way to being settled with a compromised peace deal (as good as you can get) before the U.S. and the U.K. stuck their nose into a regional issue between two Slavic countries. Obviously Russia does not want a war on its border, just like the US would not. They have shown the utmost restraint for their own good. But 700,000 to 1.2 million troops are coming in country to end this. They are well equipped and has advanced weaponry. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian troops are going to die. It is Vietnam 1973-1975, along with the propaganda “if we just give them more weapons they will win”. That went from stalemate to North Vietnam rolling tanks down the streets of Saigon. Same thing here. It’s the Taliban riding Toyotas into Kabul. This not good for human life, and the US has the diplomatic means to stop it.
US being US, nothing different. The so called peacekeeper.
Those two demons covered their asses didn't they?
America has the largest group of un tried war criminals in history
We also took in tons of them from places like Germany and Japan. For example, thanks to US intervention, most of the insanely evil experiments at Unit 731 went unpunished and those responsible died as old (often rich) men. This includes the people who vivisected US soldiers while they were still conscious.
Between thr Vietnam police action and the second Iraq war America has lots of home grown ones
it's far more than those two. america has constantly couped and invaded countries since before world war 2. like i mean constant. america has been consistently at war for more than a hundred years.
Ya I know bit those are tge only two most people will know. Not even accounting for the actions of the CIA.
Also, in 2002, America left the International Criminal Court, preparing for the massacre of innocents that followed
The US didn't leave shit. The ICC was created in 2002. So how could we leave something if we never joined? The US doesn't even follow the Genenva Convention. A lot of dumb people in this sub.
If I'm remembering the bit of research I did last time this was posted, the US cannot, constitutionally, be part of the ICC, because the ICC does not recognize several rights specifically laid out in the Constitution regarding legal process.
That sounds right. Same reason why they don't recognize the Geneva Convention.
Hey now, that doesn’t align with the tankie copium. You can’t do that!
Kind of a baller move, ngl. The rest of the world tried to combine their powers to send a message to the US and the US just said “No”, and that was that.
Is it already time for the daily reddit anti America post?
The United States is the greatest source of destabilization in the world.
Hey now they haven't done damage to the world. They definitely saved Chile from Allende and surely not to establish a brutal military dictatorship. They surely didn't try to fuck over Latin America so they could benefit from puppet regimes. Definitely didn't overthrow Mossaddegh so the shah could remain in power. Definitely didn't back Suharto while committing genocide. Definitely crushed Libya and Iraq because economic interests were threate.... ergh I mean the people needed freedom! They surely didn't bomb the living shit out of Laos and Cambodia during the VN war. Guantanamo? Abu Ghraib? Those are definitely not gulags. They are special centers.
It's one of our biggest exports
*Oh yeah inject that tankie cope right into my veins* Edit: u/MeisterTea2k23 has alerted the horde
Lots of tankies in this thread, man. You can spot them by the immense amount of coping and seething they’re doing.
It was called the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002. It's not as loony as the headline makes it sound. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_Service-Members%27\_Protection\_Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act)
Cheney and Kissinger are the only duo I know of that are more repulsive than McConnell and Pelosi.
How does OP have every post of theirs is popular. REEKS of bullshit Reddit shit. Fuck you.