Kick Russia off the UN Security Council as a permanent member

[Ahlevah]

Human Rights Declarations and International Criminal Courts are great things.... but they're not worth the paper they're printed on unless nations willingly abide by them.

I'll remind you that the US is in exactly the same boat as Russia where it comes to the ICC.... we both signed on and subsequently withdrew.

As i said to the other poster, I'm not in favor of surrendering American sovereignty to any unelected judge or bureaucrat from any international body. And, honestly, if push ever came to shove, I can't see any nation that would, as a matter of practice, have its leadership march to The Hague to surrender for war crimes or crimes against humanity, can you? I mean, do you feel better that Afghanistan is a signatory nation, so we don't have to worry about the Taliban committing war crimes? How naiive does one have to be to believe any of this crap?

 

[Cordelier]

As i said to the other poster, I'm not in favor of surrendering American sovereignty to any unelected judge or bureaucrat from any international body. And, honestly, if push ever came to shove, I can't see any nation that would, as a matter of practice, have its leadership march to The Hague to surrender for war crimes or crimes against humanity, can you? I mean, do you feel better that Afghanistan is a signatory nation, so we don't have to worry about the Taliban committing war crimes? How naiive does one have to be to believe any of this crap?

I'm sure as hell more comfortable with that than I am with having some bloated orange SOB give war criminals pardons.

 

[oneworld2]

Still, if offered a big, fat carrot like that I'd bet they'd take it. Countries say a lot of things, until something comes along to change their calculus. Until a week ago, Switzerland, Finland, and Sweden were ostensibly neutral. Then Putin bitchslapped them out of their idealistic fantasy world into ours. Should we tell them to go to hell because they might upset the Russians?



Americans value their freedom and sovereignty, as well as democracy and having elected representatives who are charged with ensuring that freedom and sovereignty. So if it takes forty years to access whether giving up that sovereignty to an international body comprised of unelected bureaucrats, regardless of the cause, is a good idea, then that's what it should take. Personally, I don't care what the cause is. We should never surrender or compromise even the smallest token of our national sovereignty.



Well, you're the librarian, so I would have hoped you would have placed the history in proper context when doing your comparison. I mean, try reading a book why dontcha, and I don't mean Grimms' Fairy Tales. Start with the fact that the Japanese were not peaceful innocents attacked by a monster set on empire building. Rather, they had, beginning in the 1920s, engaged in a brutal conquest of much of the Far East. The Empire of Japan was an existential threat to these nations. Then there's the minor detail of Japan attacking us. The Japanese mindset was one of fanaticism, where every citizen owed a duty to the Emperor to defend the homeland. American daylight, high-altitude bombing proved to be largely ineffective against the Japanese war machine because the Japanese had spread the manufacturing of war material among the civilian populace. By doing so they made those populations a strategic target. The American aim was not genocide, i.e. to exterminate the Japanese race, but a policy of total war as a means to destroy Japan's ability to wage war and bring the contest to a conclusion as expeditiously as possible because our leadership believed, I think rightly, that that was the only way to bring the nation to heel.

soz snipped for word count

No need to speculate on India anymore............You never answered this

" Why not " boot" the USA off it ( UNSC) too, if your criteria is whether nations start illegal wars?"

You said, " we don't make our war doctrine genocide", I am just letting you know that if the US ever did commit a genocide they have taken themselves out of any aparatus to be charged with it and that's illuminating imo even if you don't think so.

Has Putin committed or stated a wish to commit genocide? I agree that the bombings are almost certainly war crimes and crimes against humanity etc but genocide?

I would argue that the US attack on Iraq was also riddled with war crimes, the terminology was different but that's par for the course with propaganda systems. How many innocents died as a result of that ? How much civilian infrastructure was bombed to pieces? Additionally, the USA bankrolls Israel who bombs the shit out of Gaza knowing that Israel employs its Dahiya doctrine, which is mass destruction of civilian areas. They are all vile but you appear to only see the ugliness when Russians are doing it?

It doesn't matter whether people have engaged in combat prior to the war. The fact remains that the USA systematically started to destroy entire cities, people can justify that or not but the point is it happened. So how can people in the US really point fingers at others that aren't even doing it to anywhere near the same degree.

Your posts are just full of the same shit American exceptionalism as many others here. On virtually every level of criticism aimed at Russia for its attack on Ukraine we can find the same or worse in the history of your own nations wars. If they are vile when Russians commit them, or Chinese or whoever, they are just as vile when your own nation does them. Be consistent or at least try.

 

[oneworld2]

Now, here you've just completely gone off the rails. The "you" was the United Nations. And it was the United States and Britain that prevented Saddam's genocidal program against the Kurds in the North and the Shias in the South with an enforced no-fly zone. The UN established a program, the so-called "Oil for Food" program, in an attempt to get food and medicine to people who needed it. I'll admit the execution was not what it should have been, thanks to some degree to UN corruption, but to claim that we were engaging in program of genocide is horseshit. Honestly, I think people who supposedly know better don't really understand the meaning of the word.



Okay, I imagine part of the problem was the fact the Soviets did not adhere to the promises they made under various WWII-era accords such as the Potsdam Agreement and march back home to Moscow like they should have. Instead, they decided to stick around in most of Eastern Europe and engage in the nasty things the they did for almost fifty years to the point that they had to build walls to keep people in. So it's natural that countries like Poland and the Baltic Republics weren't too keen on falling into the Russian orbit following the breakup of the Soviet Union. I mean, unlike the Soviet Union, which decades before had forced entry of its various puppet states into the Warsaw Pact, NATO wasn't holding a gun to anyone's head to join the alliance. These countries applied to join. NATO's aim is to ensure stability, and if that includes keeping Russia from trying to invade former client states then that's what needs to be done. And if anything has hammered that point home it's the events of the past week. The Russians need to understand that people these days like things like freedom and democracy rather than 19th and 20th Century concepts like buffer zones and spheres of influence. They don't like being subjugated. And Lebensraum was supposed to have died with Hitler.

I will accept the qualification on sanctions and acknowledge I was wrong, they were UN sanctions

The " genocide" you refer to was actually the Iraqi govs response to the uprising Bush 1 had inspired in the ordinary Iraqis themselves. Some Iraqis, stupid enough to believe that they would be supported by the US led coalition ( a strong sense of deja vu here) asked for weapons captured by the coalition in their bid to overthrow SH. They were refused them and to put a final nail in their coffins the ceasefire talks allowed SH forces the only available means to put the uprising down, attack helicopters. Sure it was a " mistake"

During the no fly zone period the Turks were allowed over the border to stick it to the Kurds killing who knows how many.

So your commentary isn't exactly right now is it? and your charge that the Russians have a war doctrine based on genocide might show that you yourself are happy to misuse the terms you claim others are misusing. I didn't believe Putin when he used it tio describe events in Donbas and unless something dramatically changes I wouldn't accept it to describe the current attack on Ukraine.

The better question might be why wasn't NATO disbanded at the end of the Cold War and a new, Russia inclusive, alliance built on cooperation set up in its place? The eastward expansion of NATO was both unnecessary and provocative imo we cannot go back in time to change that now, so we will have to accept that that's gone for good , that said, to try to claim that the eastward expansion is somehow benign to the national security of Russia is a ridiculous assertion imo. The US would never have accpted a rival mass military alliance on their doorstep complete with missile bases etc but nobody wants to discuss that here. I wonder why?

 

[Fledermaus]

I will accept the qualification on sanctions and acknowledge I was wrong, they were UN sanctions

The " genocide" you refer to was actually the Iraqi govs response to the uprising Bush 1 had inspired in the ordinary Iraqis themselves. Some Iraqis, stupid enough to believe that they would be supported by the US led coalition ( a strong sense of deja vu here) asked for weapons captured by the coalition in their bid to overthrow SH. They were refused them and to put a final nail in their coffins the ceasefire talks allowed SH forces the only available means to put the uprising down, attack helicopters. Sure it was a " mistake"

During the no fly zone period the Turks were allowed over the border to stick it to the Kurds killing who knows how many.

So your commentary isn't exactly right now is it? and your charge that the Russians have a war doctrine based on genocide might show that you yourself are happy to misuse the terms you claim others are misusing. I didn't believe Putin when he used it tio describe events in Donbas and unless something dramatically changes I wouldn't accept it to describe the current attack on Ukraine.

The better question might be why wasn't NATO disbanded at the end of the Cold War and a new, Russia inclusive, alliance built on cooperation set up in its place? The eastward expansion of NATO was both unnecessary and provocative imo we cannot go back in time to change that now, so we will have to accept that that's gone for good , that said, to try to claim that the eastward expansion is somehow benign to the national security of Russia is a ridiculous assertion imo. The US would never have accpted a rival mass military alliance on their doorstep complete with missile bases etc but nobody wants to discuss that here. I wonder why?

Anfal Campaign.

Anfal campaign - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[oneworld2]

Anfal Campaign.

Anfal campaign - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Anfal was in a different period to that being discussed and was the time period when the US was assisting SH at the time he was using gas to kill Iranians and Kurds. The US then lied about Iranians being responsible for the Halabja massacre


^^^^^
Disingenouos attempt to dupe the readers here noted

 

[Ahlevah]

I will accept the qualification on sanctions and acknowledge I was wrong, they were UN sanctions

The " genocide" you refer to was actually the Iraqi govs response to the uprising Bush 1 had inspired in the ordinary Iraqis themselves. Some Iraqis, stupid enough to believe that they would be supported by the US led coalition ( a strong sense of deja vu here) asked for weapons captured by the coalition in their bid to overthrow SH. They were refused them and to put a final nail in their coffins the ceasefire talks allowed SH forces the only available means to put the uprising down, attack helicopters. Sure it was a " mistake"

The problem with overthrowing Saddam was the UN mandate was limited in scope to extricating him from Kuwait. The international coalition tasked with doing that was assembled with that understanding. That should have been plain for all to see. I lost count of the number of times Bush said it.

During the no fly zone period the Turks were allowed over the border to stick it to the Kurds killing who knows how many.

Not sure what you're talking about here. Turkey was a participant in Operation Northern Watch, as was Britain. My understanding is most of the sorties in the north were conducted by the British, while the United States protected the largely Shiite, southern region of Iraq.

So your commentary isn't exactly right now is it?

I think your attempt at whataboutism to draw a parallel between anything the United States has done in recent memory to Russia's attempt to annex Ukraine is just so much hooey. If you want to go back to Andrew Jackson's efforts to relocate or exterminate Indians, I can possibly see a parallel there, but that's about it.

The Unlikely Origins of Russia's Manifest Destiny

How an obscure academic and a marginalized philosopher captured the minds of the Kremlin and helped forge the new Russian nationalism.

foreignpolicy.com