Selling weapons to parties engaged in a conflict, to an extent even if they are used for warcrimes is not among the list of crimes that the ICC has jurisdiction for. You can argue that it should be on the list and I’d be inclined to agree with you, but the entire point of a court like this is that it REALLY has to do things by the book to maintain its acceptance.

Yeah… That kinda highlights my whole argument doesn’t it? The ICC isn’t independent enough to go after the arms dealers who make genocide possible in the first place. Like I said, it’s bound by the governments in its member states. Sure you can go after the guy who uses the weapons I sold to do horrendous crimes, but you can’t go after the people who knowingly sold them the tools of genocide. Convenient.

Not really, it’s actually quite diverse!

Just because the judges are from a wide range of countries doesn’t mean there isn’t a bias input from wealthier nations. Most cases put forward to be prosecuted by the ICC are done by NGO, most of which operate out of wealthier member states.

“The ICC has been accused of bias and as being a tool of Western imperialism, only punishing leaders from small, weak states while ignoring crimes committed by richer and more powerful states.[315][316][317][318] This sentiment has been expressed particularly by African leaders due to an alleged disproportionate focus of the Court on Africa, while it claims to have a global mandate. Until January 2016, all nine situations which the ICC had been investigating were in African countries.”

Define white… They are prosecuting 6 Russians, 3 Israelis, 3 Georgians, 3 Palestinians and 1 person from Myanmar of 65 people total, the remainder being from a variety of African countries.

It’s a stupid human construct that changes over time to suit “white” people’s needs. However, in this case I would say its fair to assume white means ethnicities hailing from western Europe. Historically serbs aren’t really considered white by western Europeans, but that kinda depends on your level of racism. I’m not really an expert as I am not of European descent, and my people never felt the urge to measure people’s skulls for pseudo science.

So, maybe some of the Russians are white depending on if they’re ethnically serb, Scandinavian, or turkic. So even if we’re counting all the Russians as “white”, it still means that over 90% of all people issued warrants from the court are POC. Not a good look.

Okay, you can of course say that no one prosecuted is white, by setting the standards for being white arbitrarily high. If you demand someone whose ancestors for the last 10 generations have lived in a Norwegian Fjord, then yes, none of them are white.

Lol, okay so we’re giving racism the benefit of doubt? How about we go off of something more solid, like historical context?

“. Ante Starčević, the leader of the Party of Rights between 1851 and 1896, believed Croats should confront their neighbors, including Serbs.[10] He wrote, for example, that Serbs were an “unclean race” and with the co-founder of his party, Eugen Kvaternik, denied the existence of Serbs or Slovenes in Croatia, seeing their political consciousness as a threat.”

“In the 1920s, Italian fascists accused Serbs of having “atavistic impulses” and they claimed that the Yugoslavs were conspiring together on behalf of “Grand Orient masonry and its funds”. One antisemitic claim was that Serbs were part of a “social-democratic, masonic Jewish internationalist plot”.[40] Benito Mussolini viewed not just the Serbs but the whole “Slavic race” as inferior and barbaric.”

"Serbs as well as other Slavs (mainly Poles and Russians) as well as non-Slavic peoples (such as Jews and Roma) were not considered Aryans by Nazi Germany. Instead, they were considered subhuman, inferior races (Untermenschen) and foreign races and as a result, they were not considered part of the Aryan master race.[48][49] Serbs, along with the Poles, were at the bottom of the Slavic “racial hierarchy”

“According to Vojislav Koštunica and British commentator Mary Dejevky, in the summer of 1995 the French president, Jacques Chirac created controversy when he commented on the Bosnian War, he reportedly called Serbs “a nation of robbers and terrorists”.[93][94”

“During the war in Croatia, French writer Alain Finkielkraut insinuated that Serbs were inherently evil, comparing Serb actions to the Nazis during World War II.[95]”

Because this really isn’t a European perspective, the entire distinction between white and non-white matters a lot less here. And not even because there is necessarily less racism, but because the racism that is around isn’t really about whiteness.

Ahh, yes please explain racism to me white European. I as a Korean person living in the west must not understand the intricate scientific system of your forefathers. Shall we pull out your grandpa’s skull measuring calipers and charts to explain how racism in Europe excludes whiteness as a concept?

I’ve lived in Europe before, and this is just a fucking lie white Europeans tell themselves as if ore their fellow countryman throw bananas at black football players. Get bent.

Not necessarily, but it has done reasonably well with regards to what it sanctioned and is the relevant body who decides on the legality of wars. Which is what matters here, not whether or not you or me agree with every individual decision.

Legality does not dictate morality. The afghan war is very modern history, the Iraq war is very modern history, hell even the Vietnam war was modern. You are just ignoring or excluding examples that don’t suit your bias.

Yes, but most of those colonialists are no longer available to be judged and since the events predate the Rome statute wouldn’t be accessible to it anyways.

The coup belt that started in 2020 is a direct result of competing European colonialism in modern Africa between Turkey, Russia, and France.

So far they haven’t and there have also definitely be some that made it clear that they will comply with the rules, as well as some that tried to avoid giving clear statements.

Wanna make a bet?

They don’t have jurisdiction for the US and for the other 6 there is no clear precedent. I would expect most of them to comply, though it is unlikely to come up because most of them would likely prosecute their criminals themselves if it reached the point where the ICC would look.

Unless it’s something like supplying weapons to commit genocides… That’s conveniently not illegal.

that is no longer an argument about whether it would deserve the right to execute people

How? My original assertion is that a requirement of capital punishment is a non biased court. Establishing that the court is innately biased sure seems like a cohesive argument.

It has definitely started to show some attitude with Israel. that’s more than most other institutions can say of themselves.

I mean, it is kinda worrying that the first people who can pass as “white” being prosecuted by the court are serbs and Jews. It’s not like those have a history of ethnic persecution in Europe.

in any case the fault of France, not of the ICC.

Like any international body, the ICC is only as legitimate as it’s member states willingness to participate.

What makes you think that?

“Let’s not pretend that Africans are somehow infantile children who are not responsible for their own actions.” Mainly that… But it’s kinda besides the point, as you aren’t responsible for who gets prosecuted by the ICC.

Please name reasonably recent examples, preferably ones where it is not the US doing it.

“NATO powers such as the United Kingdom and the United States support the Saudi Arabian–led intervention in Yemen primarily through arms sales and technical assistance.[396] France had also made recent military sales to Saudi Arabia”

“The tribunal requested a thorough investigation as some of the evidence indicated “possible acts of genocide”.[28] Its panel found Sri Lanka guilty of genocide at its 7–10 December 2013 hearings in Berman, Germany. It also found that the US and UK were guilty of complicity.”

" 2008 report by the Rwandan government-sponsored Mucyo Commission accused the French government of knowing of preparations for the genocide and helping to train Hutu militia members."

“Since the war began, both regional and international powers have been actively involved in the conflict. A number of reports have been made alleging that China, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates were all providing military support for the Ethiopian government via the sale of weaponized drones.”

“October 2023, political analyst Lena Obermaier argued that Germany is complicit in Israel’s war crimes against Gaza.[6”

"On 12 December 2023, Human Rights Watch said that selling weapons to Israel could make the UK complicit in war crimes. "

"In March, OXFAM released a statement detailing its intention, alongside several other NGOs,[p] to sue Denmark to prevent arms sales to Israel, warning that by selling arms Denmark is “complicit in violations of international humanitarian law … and a plausible genocide”.

And the ICC is kinda doing the opposite. Really not comparable, as I said.

Lol, the ICC isn’t run by economically advanced states? They haven’t primarily prosecuted people in poor states?

People in those rich states never participated in war crimes?

That’s an unfair standard, considering that the ICC has so far sentenced 8 (EIGHT!) people from 2 (TWO) case-groups to prison, both of which concerned civil wars in Africa.

And how many POC were prosecuted vs white people?

three case groups (Georgia, Russia, Israel) is something that you would have justify.

Sure, western Europeans historically haven’t viewed serbs as “white”. We already talked about Israel.

Again, how many people have been prosecuted that are white?

The thing is: Since the Iraq-war most European countries neither had large civil wars, nor did they really participate in other wars that were not UN-sanctioned.

Ahh yes, the UN is immune from unethical wars…

The fact of the matter is that they are doing more in Africa simply because Africa has a lot of civil wars

And why exactly does Africa have a lot of civil wars…? Hmmm…maybe the hundreds of years of western colonialism and interventionist actions on the continent might have something to do with it?

I guess that is why it went against most of those countries and prosecuted Netanjahu?

Only to have it’s own member states ignore the court they belong to?

The ICC is independent, that’s the whole point!

So long as they don’t prosecute anyone from the G7… Sure.

Who should then prosecute those crimes that are otherwise not accessible to prosecution? The ICC only gets active if there is no serious attempt at prosecution in the country itself!

Lol, I’ve said this several times. I don’t inherently think the ICC itself is evil or anything, I just don’t think they’re really effective at doing anything unless it fits within the geopolitical will of its wealthiest member states. The problem is systemic in nature, and no matter what anyone in the ICC believes no international body is truly independent.

That has not happened yet. It may happen, but let’s not accuse them of things they haven’t done yet.

Frances foreign minister has already claimed that he’s immune from prosecution…

It was still them committing the war crimes. Let’s not pretend that Africans are somehow infantile children who are not responsible for their own actions.

Lol, great choice of language there… I would like to point out those are your words, not mine.

Also, weren’t you the one claiming that the “desk” perpetrators should be the ones executed. I guess that sentiment ends conveniently with the warlord and not the people who enable them?

I’m not claiming they don’t hold blame, I’m just saying that the governments whom caused the material conditions for a a warlord to rise to power hold that same responsibility. In a lot of cases these warlords are sponsored by Western nations trying to destabilize governments that politically align against them.

And the European involvement in those cases is usually also far more removed than that accussation makes it seem.

the European involvement in those cases is usually also far more removed than that accussation makes it seem.

Weird, it’s almost like the ICC only prosecutes the crimes of people that oppose western geopolitical agenda. Curious.

The sorry excuse for a justice system that the US has is for many reasons a whole different can of worms.

I beg to differ. It’s a very similar asymmetrical hierarchical structure that allows people in power to enforce rules on people who don’t have power, for engaging in the same crimes as the people in power.

To make it short: The issues with white people getting away with shit more often than black people (and I’m not convinced that that is as much a problem if we are talking about homicides

"Black people were six times more likely to be arrested for homicide in 2020 than white people. " “According to the FBI, 55.9% of homicide offenders were African-American, 41.1% were white, and 3% were of other races.”

Sure…not a big problem.

doesn’t mean that the solution is to let black people get away with first degree murder. The issue is that white people can get away with shit, not that black people can’t!

I never made that claim, I just said that it’s not really a justice system if one race is allowed to do crimes and other races are not.

That is a completely different situation.

Why? Because it’s damaging to your argument?

A better analog would be if the federal police investigated murders happening in predominantly black communities more often than murders in predominantly white communitie

I think a better analog would be that the government came up with a an entire new justice system that only investigated crimes committed by black people… While local police continue ignoring the crimes committed by white people.

The problem is that that is not what is happening in the US, but it is kinda what is happening within the countries that ratified the Rome statute.

White savior moment…

They are not immune though: The justice system is fully prepared to treat them like everyone else, the problem is that sometimes it doesn’t have jurisdiction (when something happens between non-member countries) or where you have to be concerned about whether corrupt cops are willing to let the criminal go despite an arrest warrant.

Lol, sure. I’m sure the foreign minister of France is sticking their necks out for a genocider from Kenya…

Please, name one white person who the ICC has put in jail. Hell, name 1 white person who the ICC has prosecuted before 2020. At the end of the day the ICC is a political body of countries whom have geopolitical agenda, and are willing to turn a blind eye when it suits them.

but it is really important to still look at who is on the other side and not to get blinded by accusations of hypocrisy, which is really just another form of whataboutism that in this case is even more inappropriate than in most others.

My friend, I’m not saying that warlords shouldn’t be prosecuted. I’m just pointing out that the ICC is not a non biased judicial system, at least not to the point where id trust them with the ability to prescribe capital punishment.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not a whataboutism. I never once validated crimes of anyone’s crimes because other crimes occurred that were not policed. My original rebuttal still stands true, the ICC isn’t non biased enough to prescribe death warrants.

Obviously I believe that the rome statute needs to be signifiantly extended and the ICC should for starters receive flat out universal jurisdiction: A big reason for why so few western people have been charged at it (though: Netanjahu and Puttler are now on the list!) is that a lot of the stuff that could be charged at it happened between nations that were not members of the ICC, meaning that it lacked jurisdiction.

Right, but even when people like netanjahu are charged by the ICC, the wealthy European members states fail to enforce their convictions.

Even today you can also turn it around and say that it first and foremost gives justice to victims of color. Which is arguably much more important than the skin-color distribution of the genocidal trash that the convict!

I think that’s kinda europe patting themselves on the back for “solving” an issue they often caused in the first place. I don’t think putting retired African war criminals on trial is very meaningful when that war criminal was empowered by European colonialism in the first place.

On that note, it bears mentioning that there is no right to get away with crimes just because others do!

Eh… I think that’s highly reductive. If I made the same claims about about the systemic racism in American policing would you be defending the American justice system?

Would you interpret that the American justice system is giving justice to POC when they arrest POC because they are the most victimized segment of our society? That ignores the systemic nature of how the victimization occurred in the first place.

At the end of the day, it’s not really a justice system if certain segments of society are immune from penalties being applied to only the disadvantaged participants. At some point it’s just a tool utilized to negate the competition from practicing the same crimes that others have utilized to achieve their position on the global scale.

This should ideally be handed out by the ICC and no other court.

The main problem with any type of capital punishment is that it relies on an unbiased court system with reaching powers. The ICC has a pretty well established history of really only being able to prosecute criminals from impoverished nations.

If the ICC did execute war criminals, it would be an “international” court that almost exclusively executed people of color.

Even ignoring the math, the assertion that a statistically unlikely amount of bullet ballots means there has been fraud is kinda out there. Historically, bullet ballots are fairly common with populist candidates.

Yeah, but a central tenet of nuclear deterrence is that you don’t constantly posture your own position with nuclear armaments. If you keep saying if you cross this red line we’ll go nuclear, and then don’t … It makes future threats pretty laughable.

International nuclear relations have already been gamed out. It’s always a last case scenario, because everyone has a sense of self preservation, especially the narcissistic types that like to be in charge of countries.

No one wants to live in a nuclear wasteland, so no one is going to create a nuclear wasteland unless they feel that they themselves are in immediate existential danger, and even then it would be an action made in spite.

Yeah, was not what he was about.

When he praised trump from pulling out of Afghanistan and Syria, I asked how the people in those countries are doing now, and his reply was he didn’t care, he just cares for the people in this country.

https://lemmy.world/comment/13550018.

They’re just participating in a bit of dramatic virtue signaling. Looks like the candidate they voted for is also a member of Justice Democrats, the entire reason he went on his conspiratorial rhetoric about AOC.

Ends up their “research” isn’t very good.

Lol, Rashida Tlaib is a member of Justice Democrats… The same evil cabal that you accused of orchestrating AOC’s ascension to the future presidency…

How did this get by your super in depth ethics based research?

Maybe a better word for simple would have been straight forward. It’s a complex web of tit for tat, but the underlying motivation and how it’s actually accomplished is fairly straightforward.

There is no reason to believe that there is a need to create a secret society of liberal ngo that hand pick the future president. Pacs and political think tanks are completely legal, and have no real fear of operating in the daylight.

And what politician on your ballot passed your highly rigorous ethical research? Who did you end up voting for?

Regulatory capture is a real, PERVASIVE

No shit…

How does regulatory capture play into your highly specific accusation?

Does the org have a history of involving itself in regulatory capture? Do it’s members work for other organizations that involve themselves in regulatory capture? What specific bills have Omar or aoc put towards forward that you think are part of regulatory capture, and how is the defunct org that sponsored them in 2016 involved?

Again, you are taking generally true concepts and then applying them very specific accusation with little to no real logic or evidence. This is conspiratorial thinking

Maybe just pump the brakes and breathe for a second? You are starting to sound like some pizza gate schizophrenic.

not the one appearing in the comment section to excuse a congresswoman that was groomed

Lol, is the leader of the secret society of liberals in the room with you right now?

Again, I’m not defending anyone here. I’m just simply pointing out that the organization you are accusing of being in charge of the entire outlook of dnc is a pretty straightforward liberal think tank that is now defunct.

They did this for dozens of candidates, and failed with the vast majority of them. I think the only two people I can think of who are still around are aoc and ilhan Omar.

You are just giving them and the Democrats way too much credit.

Tbh, I’m not really sure how the dnc will respond to the trump presidency, but it would surprise me if they don’t stumble through the process and ultimately end up even further center right.

If it barks like a neolib, excuses genocide like a neolib, breaks national labor strikes like a neolib, kisses Papa bear Pelosi’s ass like a neolib, it just might be a neolib.

Lol, I wasn’t making any claims on neoliberalism. I was just saying the org Justice Democrats isn’t some cabal of movers and shakers planting neolib sleep agents…

Stop being so fucking dramatic.

How performative… Everyone, please clap.

I had an argument on here with a supposed green party voter who “hated trump”, but admired him for his sincere efforts to end wars…

I reminded them about ending the nuclear deal with Iran and then assassinating their most idolized military commander. He just went on to admit he didn’t care about a war with Iran.

There are so many “green voters” who are just trump supporters turfing as leftist on this site.

Lol, id hardly call Justice Democrats “the establishment”. They are libs of course, but it’s just a pet project of some of Sanders old campaign staff and a dude from the Young Turks.

I don’t think they’re even operational anymore, and there only real goal was to make libs slightly more progressive. Assigning so much control and enigma to the project of a few fail sons is giving them too much credit.

People need to stop engaging in so much conspiratorial thinking, reality is usually much a lot more simple and boring than people like to suppose.

I wish I could say the feelings mutual.

It’s fascinating to see how people like you seem to imagine everyone who disagrees with you as some sycophant obsessed with a political party. When in reality I’m not a fan of Democrats, and expected them to lose. I’m just kinda disgusted with the amount of people who don’t understand the very basic concept of harm reduction.

I am the product of a bi-racial marriage, in a bi-racial racial marriage, living in one of the most conservative states in America. I’m worried for trans and queer friends, I’m worried for my openly bisexual wife, and I’m worried about some of my patients. Several of which are families that have been brave enough to seek gender affirming care for their kids in Oklahoma of all places.

The last time Trump was elected we had to do so much more work creating mutual aid and self defense networks. When that man is in power, people get more aggressively bigoted.

I get that symbolically voting green is great. In reality everyone knows that in modern times it’s statistically impossible for 3rd parties to win any significant election. It’s just sad to realize that so many people forget the very basics of mutual aid. And on a personal note, financially it’s just not a great time for me to restart my defense and aid budget.