- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,444
- Reaction score
- 39,017
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Thoughts are?WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a judgment allowing families of victims of the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut and other terrorist attacks to collect nearly $2 billion in frozen Iranian funds.
The court on Wednesday ruled 6-2 in favor of more than 1,300 relatives of the 241 U.S. service members who died in the Beirut bombing and victims of other attacks that courts have linked to Iran.
If you back actions then you are accountable, period.
What if the Japanese and the Cambodians decide to sue us?
What if the Japanese and the Cambodians decide to sue us?
It begs the political question, why is the Obama Administration opposing a similar Congressional action regarding Saudi Arabia and 9/11 if he supported this action by Congress for the surviving families or Iranian terror?
From a legal standpoint, it sets a precedent that other countries can now use to seize assets of US citizens abroad for the purpose of recouping "victims" (although the US victims were in fact victims) of damages defined by another country of US foreign policy that those countries disagree with. We tend to forget from time to time that when we act unilaterally on an international stage that other countries have the sovereign power to do the same to us, leaving our citizens abroad at risk of reprisal.
All that said, I agree with the ruling.
Pointless remark since the OP ruling was under a US court.Then the Chinese, Koreans, etc sue the hell out of the Japanese.
.
If I recall the Cambodians were under the Khmer Rouge or at the least large chunks of the country where.
Not to mention both of those were wars, as opposed to the incidents in Beirut
Pointless remark since the OP ruling was under a US court.
Wrong. You need to read up on what Kissinger did. It is tantamount to a war crime.
But if the Japanese sue the United States for the air raids and such---which, seeing as we were in a war, were completely justified---then the Chinese and Koreans are more than capable of suing the Japanese over their treatment of civilians.
Or hell, have the families of the POWS murdered by the Japanese sue them.
As for the Khmer Rouge, cry me a river. We should have bombed them even more than we did in the first place.
Its clear you have no idea what youre talking about, which is pretty much the same with all your replies. We didnt bomb the Khmer Rouge, we bombed and caused the deaths of 100K civilians and started a war in Cambodia with no announcement whatsoever. Try reading up on the subject before you reply next time.
I think the answer is concern for what the economic consequences would be if Saudi Arabia makes good on their threat to dump $750 billion in assets and securities. Same reason why Republican leadership is killing the legislation that would allow it.
What difference will this ruling make?
Will Iran now pay up?
The US froze billions in Iranian cash that was placed within the US by the bank in the OP story. The money is there already, available to be distributed by the US government to the survivors.
So, yes. They have already paid up, the survivors just haven't seen the cash yet, which is about to change.
Are these assets owned by Iran, or its citizens? If the latter, it seems like clear theft.
What if the Japanese and the Cambodians decide to sue us?
Wasn't that cash part of the deal recently made?
What is going to happen if the US goes back on it's part of the deal?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?