ICC inaction enables Israeli occupation violence

[oneworld2]

Takes a lot of desperation over own argumentative failing to jump from this thread's topic to Nicaragua.

It is not that much of a " jump " to cite a world court ruling on the aggression of the USA towards Nicaragua to bolster a claim that the US has a history of rebuking international courts/conventions set up to prevent or provide accountability for international crimes.

Next thing we'll be in Vietnam.

We don't have to go back that far, we can cite Syria and Iraq or Afghanistan

But that's OW2 for you, deflect by whataboutism and run from the stated fact that the US delegating its judicial system even in part to the ICC would be unconstitutional.

Yep that's me, backing my claims/opinions with data and applying the same standards to all parties with a good old dose of whataboutism. That you think it is somehow detrimental to me is hysterical and only shows your own preference for unsubstantiated claims built on and around a preferred bias.

 

[oneworld2]

Yep. He was just attempting to invent ICC jurisdiction as he knew Israel was not a signatory to that kangaroo court whose prosecutions are primarily motivated by politics.

The claim was whether the ICC has jurisdiction in Palestine NOT Israel. At least pretend that you have the ability to follow the dialogue

 

[oneworld2]

I showed in this post that the palestinians can't grant jurisdiction to ICC because they don't have it, so of course the ICC don't have jurisdiction. I also showed how poor oneworld2 argument's, he remains silent about it...

I left this until now because it is the valid argument against whether the PA has the authority to give the ICC jurisdiction in the OPTs. I was just letting things run so we could all see the pathetic commentary of those that cry about criminality while hoping their own criminals never face justice in such a way.

You are right to contend what was given away at Oslo might refute the right of the PA to give jurisdiction to the ICC,. The real value of this story is not in the hope that justice by the ICC is likely to be served because I don't think it will be. But the whole issue opens up many aspects of the conflict up to the court of public opinion.

As you might know, I have consistently slated the PA sell out at Oslo and how the Palestinians were sold out by the PA for their own averice . They sold the rights of a people for power and money and the people now know it. Contractors to the occupation they are supposed to be fighting, a sick joke. At least Hamas had the political expediency to recognize that any moves onb Palestinian rights/statehood should only be granted after a national referendum lols

 

[Fledermaus]

" FFS " ............triggered ? lols

The ICC can indict individuals that commit crimes in places under their jurisdiction, they can issue arrest warrants and if that person shows up somewhere where they can be arrested then that's what could happen to them, regardless of whether their state/territory is a signatory to the statute. That's how I understand it.

You aren't proving me wrong, it is evident you don't want any Israelis that are committing crimes in OPTs to face charges for them. Or any Americans for that matter. The whole, loads of people haven't signed up to it, while ignoring the massive crimes these states have engaged in that the ICC was set up to prosecute people for, justification for NOT supporting the court smacks of the bias that we see here everyday from yourself and others. So yep, imo, you are supporting the status quo which is allowing criminals to go unpunished, which makes a mockery of your claims to be against criminality, and the claims of others who express similar hypocritical opinions on criminality

Since the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens how does your fantasy become reality?

Cares not a jot

Obviously...

 

[oneworld2]

Since the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens how does your fantasy become reality?

The bolded, nobody claimed it had but you obviously cannot get out of the habit of strawman riddled debate.

The ICC can prosecute the nationals of states that are not party to the Rome Statute. It has been shown already. The criteria is the territory in which the crime has taken place

 

[Fledermaus]

The bolded, nobody claimed it had but you obviously cannot get out of the habit of strawman riddled debate.

The ICC can prosecute the nationals of states that are not party to the Rome Statute. It has been shown already. The criteria is the territory in which the crime has taken place

Since the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens how does your fantasy become reality?

One of the principles of international law is that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for third states without their consent, and this is also enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

 

[Chagos]

Incidentally:

Iraq and Syria, seeing how they found mention in the usual whataboutist manner, are not signatories to the Rome Statute either.

That goes for Vietnam and Nicaragua as well.

 

[JoelNYC1]

Uh......hate to break it to you but trying to pretend there isn’t a ”Palestinian culture or identity” is blatantly false.

Arabs themselves laugh out loud: “When were there any palestinians?! Where?!”

 

[NO1]

I left this until now because it is the valid argument against whether the PA has the authority to give the ICC jurisdiction in the OPTs. I was just letting things run so we could all see the pathetic commentary of those that cry about criminality while hoping their own criminals never face justice in such a way.

There is a long time until it will get to a trial (if so), but you (and probably the ICC) already decided IDF are criminals. Of course it doesn’t say everybody think so, hence the people you referring to, are not hoping for their own “criminals” to never face justice, due to simple fact they are not criminals.

Anyway, it complete BS. IDF is using extreme measures in order to avoid harming innocent people.

You are right to contend what was given away at Oslo might refute the right of the PA to give jurisdiction to the ICC,. The real value of this story is not in the hope that justice by the ICC is likely to be served because I don't think it will be. But the whole issue opens up many aspects of the conflict up to the court of public opinion.

As you might know, I have consistently slated the PA sell out at Oslo and how the Palestinians were sold out by the PA for their own averice . They sold the rights of a people for power and money and the people now know it. Contractors to the occupation they are supposed to be fighting, a sick joke. At least Hamas had the political expediency to recognize that any moves onb Palestinian rights/statehood should only be granted after a national referendum lols

Your argument collapse even before we get to Gaza–Jericho Agreement. Your whole argument is based on the assumption that Palestinians have jurisdiction (so they can grant it), I showed it was wrong because they don’t have territories nor jurisdiction in these territories (in short - there isn’t sovereign Palestinian state), hence they cannot grant something they didn’t acquire. Now if by magic you will show the existence of sovereign palestinian state, then we can discuss about Gaza–Jericho Agreement …

Another thing, you talking about the court of public opinion shows how ridiculous ICC decision is.

 

[oneworld2]

There is a long time until it will get to a trial (if so), but you (and probably the ICC) already decided IDF are criminals. Of course it doesn’t say everybody think so, hence the people you referring to, are not hoping for their own “criminals” to never face justice, due to simple fact they are not criminals.

Of course there are criminals amongst the nationals of the states I have cited, including your own. The difference is I am happy/supportive for the ICC to investigate ALL of the allegations of war crimes/crimes against humanity that have taken place in the I/P conflict, and not just in this conflict btw. Whereas it is pretty obvious that the other side of the table from me here only want to see the criminals from the other side of the conflict investigated and/or convicted because they are conditioned to believe their own cannot be criminals

Anyway, it complete BS. IDF is using extreme measures in order to avoid harming innocent people.

Oh please, not this PR shit again lol ............We will drop a little bomb on your house before we destroy it completely 20 seconds later. Or the Dahiya Doctrine. Or the masses of dead everytime your cowardly army batters the place from the safety of being out of range . That's what the stats say

Your argument collapse even before we get to Gaza–Jericho Agreement. Your whole argument is based on the assumption that Palestinians have jurisdiction (so they can grant it), I showed it was wrong because they don’t have territories nor jurisdiction in these territories (in short - there isn’t sovereign Palestinian state), hence they cannot grant something they didn’t acquire. Now if by magic you will show the existence of sovereign palestinian state, then we can discuss about Gaza–Jericho Agreement …

What do I always say about the Oslo sell out by the PA ? That they decided to be subcontractors to those occupying and violating the very people the PA are supposed to be representing. So, I obviously knew about the legitimate Israeli argument that you have stated. You treat it like you pulled an ace ourt your sleeve in such a way as to make David Coperfield gasp, lols

Another thing, you talking about the court of public opinion shows how ridiculous ICC decision is.

Not at all. I said from the off that the ICC prosecutor has protected Israeli ( and Hamas etc ) crimes/criminals by swallowing the BS pushed out by the Israeli PR agencies. That judge you cited being a case in point. But the pressure being put onto the court is also spilling out into the public debates we are having right now.

As I said , at least we know who is full of shit when it comes to their opposition to the criminals on both sides being brought to justice for the crimes they commit. You can't even bring yourself to even acknowledge the concept about your own lol. As was ever the case, we see only the Palestinian criminals being denounced for their crimes but Jewish ones ? Nah, they're Jewish, how the **** can you be a Jew and be a criminal at the same time, God chose us for a reason lol.................BS, plain and simple

 

[oneworld2]

Incidentally:

Iraq and Syria, seeing how they found mention in the usual whataboutist manner, are not signatories to the Rome Statute either.

That goes for Vietnam and Nicaragua as well.

The relevance to that what was being discussed is what ?

Seeing as you mentioned them, and it irks you such to see the charge of criminality being put to white westerners........... the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq is a war crime. The western attacks on Syria during its civil war are crimes too. The US was found guilty by the world court for its attack, with a proxy terrorist army and for mining the ports, wrt Nicaragua. The US waged a war of aggression against the Vietnamese people through the 60s-70s killing millions

Seeing as **** all justice has ever been served on these benevolent do gooders in the law abiding West, you can't blame other countries for laughing at the idea of international justice mechanisms. I myself thought it stood for the International Court for Colour where whities and there collaborators stick it to people of colour only.

 

[Fledermaus]

The relevance to that what was being discussed is what ?

Seeing as you mentioned them, and it irks you such to see the charge of criminality being put to white westerners........... the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq is a war crime. The western attacks on Syria during its civil war are crimes too. The US was found guilty by the world court for its attack, with a proxy terrorist army and for mining the ports, wrt Nicaragua. The US waged a war of aggression against the Vietnamese people through the 60s-70s killing millions

Seeing as **** all justice has ever been served on these benevolent do gooders in the law abiding West, you can't blame other countries for laughing at the idea of international justice mechanisms. I myself thought it stood for the International Court for Colour where whities and there collaborators stick it to people of colour only.

A war of aggression?



The US was invited in by the government of South Vietnam to fight off both the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army.



And your race card is all worn out.




The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens...

 

[JoelNYC1]

Of course there are criminals amongst the nationals of the states I have cited, including your own. The difference is I am happy/supportive for the ICC to investigate ALL of the allegations of war crimes/crimes against humanity that have taken place in the I/P conflict, and not just in this conflict btw. Whereas it is pretty obvious that the other side of the table from me here only want to see the criminals from the other side of the conflict investigated and/or convicted because they are conditioned to believe their own cannot be criminals


Oh please, not this PR shit again lol ............We will drop a little bomb on your house before we destroy it completely 20 seconds later. Or the Dahiya Doctrine. Or the masses of dead everytime your cowardly army batters the place from the safety of being out of range . That's what the stats say



What do I always say about the Oslo sell out by the PA ? That they decided to be subcontractors to those occupying and violating the very people the PA are supposed to be representing. So, I obviously knew about the legitimate Israeli argument that you have stated. You treat it like you pulled an ace ourt your sleeve in such a way as to make David Coperfield gasp, lols


Not at all. I said from the off that the ICC prosecutor has protected Israeli ( and Hamas etc ) crimes/criminals by swallowing the BS pushed out by the Israeli PR agencies. That judge you cited being a case in point. But the pressure being put onto the court is also spilling out into the public debates we are having right now.

As I said , at least we know who is full of shit when it comes to their opposition to the criminals on both sides being brought to justice for the crimes they commit. You can't even bring yourself to even acknowledge the concept about your own lol. As was ever the case, we see only the Palestinian criminals being denounced for their crimes but Jewish ones ? Nah, they're Jewish, how the **** can you be a Jew and be a criminal at the same time, God chose us for a reason lol.................BS, plain and simple

Israel's military professionalism is a model for the US: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says US military learning from Israel’s extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties...
http://t.co/bpbfQaDPH0

 

[Chagos]

A war of aggression?



The US was invited in by the government of South Vietnam to fight off both the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army.



And your race card is all worn out.

View attachment 67323569


The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens...

Quite apart from the usual projections (not myself having first mentioned the afore-cited countries, but OW2), by the logic applied here the Normandy invasion was a war of aggression too.


I mean, Germany having "only" lobbed bombs and rockets into the UK and not even that into the US and Canada, the latter three had as little justification of whacking the Jerries as Israel has of whacking Hamas.

And where I agree that the invasion of Iraq was hardly legal by international standards, I'm not so sure whether the average Iraqi (or indeed Syrian) would consider him-/herself as non-white.

But then again, OW2 appearing to put them in the "brown" category wouldn't really have any relevance with the citizens there either.

 

[oneworld2]

A war of aggression?



The US was invited in by the government of South Vietnam to fight off both the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army.



And your race card is all worn out.

View attachment 67323569


The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens...

The race card is always declined by racists, it's like completely to be expected. And yes, the regime in S Vietnam reneged on the ceasefire agreement call for a democratic vote and reunification in the post French colonial period and called in the mobsters to scupper that agreement and lead to the deaths of millions of Vietnamese. I'm not surprised you defend crimes of such magnitude, you aversity to crimes are ALWAYS based on who did them and whether you are a supporter of them. It kind of sticks out like white balls on a black dog the major league hyposcrisy that are contained in your posts

The ICC DOES have jurisdiction over Israeli citizens if they commit crimes in territories that are signed up to it. Your constant denial of this reality is just a pathetic sideshow for the criminality you wish to see carrying on if the victims are Arabs.

 

[oneworld2]

Quite apart from the usual projections (not myself having first mentioned the afore-cited countries, but OW2), by the logic applied here the Normandy invasion was a war of aggression too.

I never claimed any different and acknowledge that when the subjet of US crimes and rejections of international laws I cited other countries to bolster that claim. I know you are forever running away from claims you make at the point you are pressed to back them. I'm happy to be the opposite of that and relish the constant opportunities you provide to show your penchant for petty and baseless accusations you are prone to run away from because tht reflects badly on you.

I mean, Germany having "only" lobbed bombs and rockets into the UK and not even that into the US and Canada, the latter three had as little justification of whacking the Jerries as Israel has of whacking Hamas.

The inane drivel in the above is such obvious BS so as to be embarrassing for the author, if they had the capacity for embarrassment in the first place that is. The Germans were the occupiers, remember, and those entities were there to lift those occupations. I'ts not surprising you have it arse about face again.

And where I agree that the invasion of Iraq was hardly legal by international standards, I'm not so sure whether the average Iraqi (or indeed Syrian) would consider him-/herself as non-white.

" hardly legal by international standards " wow did having to admit to a western war crime stick in your throat so much you had to come out with that diluted pos !!! Nailed again.

But then again, OW2 appearing to put them in the "brown" category wouldn't really have any relevance with the citizens there either.

Whatever colour I think the bulk of the citizenry is in any of those places, at least I don't dilute or reject the mass violations and crimes committed against them by the West or turn occupiers into liberators for discussional expediency. I leave that to all of those with a good western indoctrination/brainwashing such as yourself.

 

[oneworld2]

Israel's military professionalism is a model for the US: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says US military learning from Israel’s extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties...
http://t.co/bpbfQaDPH0

Who better to learn from than the masters of spin ? Every wouldbe state criminal should be badgering the state of Israel on how best to present a reality where the bombing of peoples homes is cheered and lauded as restraint. That those being systematically violated daily and occupied are the aggressors. That treating people so differently based on their ethnicity is not racism. That if you criticize state actions you hate the religion, etc etc

 

[Fledermaus]

The race card is always declined by racists, it's like completely to be expected. And yes, the regime in S Vietnam reneged on the ceasefire agreement call for a democratic vote and reunification in the post French colonial period and called in the mobsters to scupper that agreement and lead to the deaths of millions of Vietnamese. I'm not surprised you defend crimes of such magnitude, you aversity to crimes are ALWAYS based on who did them and whether you are a supporter of them. It kind of sticks out like white balls on a black dog the major league hyposcrisy that are contained in your posts

The ICC DOES have jurisdiction over Israeli citizens if they commit crimes in territories that are signed up to it. Your constant denial of this reality is just a pathetic sideshow for the criminality you wish to see carrying on if the victims are Arabs.

Whether or not South Vietnam "reneged" on anything is irrelevant to who was the aggressor in the war.

Calling the US defense of South Vietnam a "war of aggression" is supremely stupid.

As to jurisdiction...

One of the principles of international law is that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for third states without their consent, and this is also enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

 

[Fledermaus]

Who better to learn from than the masters of spin ? Every wouldbe state criminal should be badgering the state of Israel on how best to present a reality where the bombing of peoples homes is cheered and lauded as restraint. That those being systematically violated daily and occupied are the aggressors. That treating people so differently based on their ethnicity is not racism. That if you criticize state actions you hate the religion, etc etc

Operation Cast Lead saw a smaller percentage of collateral deaths and damage than is normal in warfare. Same with the US spanking of Iraq. Both times...

While on the other hand Hamas et al INTENTIONALLY target civilians and civilian property.

 

[oneworld2]

Whether or not South Vietnam "reneged" on anything is irrelevant to who was the aggressor in the war.

Calling the US defense of South Vietnam a "war of aggression" is supremely stupid.

As to jurisdiction...

One of the principles of international law is that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for third states without their consent, and this is also enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Of course you are going to disregard the circumstances that lead to the US attack on Vietnam, you will also not give a flying that millions of innocent people lost their lives as a result. To you it is about defending the crimes of countries you support and only " caring " ( this is evidently not the case ) about the victims of the crimes of official ( or unofficial ) state enemies/competitors.

That you are citing this again is just more desperate nonsense seeing as it refers to " states " NOT people of states. It is also hysterical that you cite this whilst talking of the US attack on Vietnam which was the reneging on a treaty.

Just a standard post of yours................ hypocritical and built on selectivity

 

[oneworld2]

Operation Cast Lead saw a smaller percentage of collateral deaths and damage than is normal in warfare. Same with the US spanking of Iraq. Both times...

While on the other hand Hamas et al INTENTIONALLY target civilians and civilian property.

Your penchant to cheer and defend crimes whilst portraying yourself as pro law/anti criminality is obvious BS/hypocritical nonsense.

To understand the casualty figures you need to understand how they are being manipulated. People who genuinely care about such stuff take the time, people like you don't.

Your chest beating about sticking it to the Iraqis is pathetic. Youy are the man who brags about how they beat up the child, at least in military terms. And it's the same with your views on the I/P . You fawn over the power of the powerul over the weak and even defend the crimes they get up to.

And, when I suggested arming the Palestinian factions to such an extent they might actually be able to stand toe to toe with the IDF you all gasped in horror. It's just way better to criticize the weak for resorting to illegal desperate/barbaric tactics than cheer the powerful cowards that beat them up in relative safety.

I am seriously glad to be on the opposite side to the likes of yourself and others here whose moral compasses are so tied to state loyalties as to render them useless. Assuming they EVER functioned at all

 

[Chagos]

arming the Palestinian factions to the point of their being able to stand on even eye level with Israel just has to be the most stupid idea anyone could have in his home office armchair war theatre.

It would constitute creating another military power the size (capacity-wise) of Israel in the region.

What the poster advocating such insanity does not realize in his abundant ignorance of the geo-politics of the whole region, is that all neighboring Arab states would see such a development with pretty much the same objection as Israel (would have).

It would be met with such opposition so as to make Jordan's 1970 crack-down on the Palestinians look like a stroll in the park.

What need not be pointed out to anyone acquainted with the power politics of the region, is that the Palestinians only find tolerance in their neighborhood as long as they're kept sufficiently small in military capacity, so as to not potentially upset bigger apple carts in adjacent Egypt, Syria, Jordan and, somewhat more distant, Saudi.

Alone the prospect of their allying themselves with Iran would cause the Arab world to rally against them. Even where their propensity for whoring money even from the Shia that is bent on subjugating all Sunni, does not necessarily mean they'd go as far as an alliance.

But yeah, sure, arm them to the teeth and watch the unfolding conflagration send them into the great void that not even Israel currently finds expedient.

One need not dwell on the other examples of the poster's verbose but inane rantings to identify the profound display of Dunning-Kruger manifesting itself here at full tilt.

 

[Fledermaus]

Your penchant to cheer and defend crimes whilst portraying yourself as pro law/anti criminality is obvious BS/hypocritical nonsense.

To understand the casualty figures you need to understand how they are being manipulated. People who genuinely care about such stuff take the time, people like you don't.

Your chest beating about sticking it to the Iraqis is pathetic. Youy(sic) are the man who brags about how they beat up the child, at least in military terms. And it's the same with your views on the I/P . You fawn over the power of the powerul(sic) over the weak and even defend the crimes they get up to.

And, when I suggested arming the Palestinian factions to such an extent they might actually be able to stand toe to toe with the IDF you all gasped in horror. It's just way better to criticize the weak for resorting to illegal desperate/barbaric tactics than cheer the powerful cowards that beat them up in relative safety.

I am seriously glad to be on the opposite side to the likes of yourself and others here whose moral compasses are so tied to state loyalties as to render them useless. Assuming they EVER functioned at all

Oh, the lies, distortions, projection and general bullshit that emanates from your keyboard when you are fact-slapped....


As to jurisdiction...

One of the principles of international law is that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for third states without their consent, and this is also enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

You might want to consult the ICC's own documents.

 

[Fledermaus]

Of course you are going to disregard the circumstances that lead to the US attack on Vietnam, you will also not give a flying that millions of innocent people lost their lives as a result. To you it is about defending the crimes of countries you support and only " caring " ( this is evidently not the case ) about the victims of the crimes of official ( or unofficial ) state enemies/competitors.

That you are citing this again is just more desperate nonsense seeing as it refers to " states " NOT people of states. It is also hysterical that you cite this whilst talking of the US attack on Vietnam which was the reneging on a treaty.

Just a standard post of yours................ hypocritical and built on selectivity

The ATTACK on SOUTH VIETNAM is why the US engaged both the VC and NVA.

The "War of Aggression" was that of the VC and NVA.

The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, nor it's military, nor it's citizens.

 

[Tigerace117]

Arabs themselves laugh out loud: “When were there any palestinians?! Where?!”

Oh look, one random dude‘s opinion. Who gives a shit?