Quote (ferdia @ Nov 22 2024 09:44pm)

Bosnian Genocide, Gaza and Palestine, Rwanda Genocide, Rohingya Genocide...

The ICJ and ICC Are Distinct:

The ICJ resolves disputes between states or provides advisory opinions on legal questions.
The ICC prosecutes individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

The ICJ Has Acted on Multiple Genocides:

The ICJ has been involved in genocide-related cases when brought under international treaties, such as the Genocide Convention.

Global Legal Obligations:

Involvement of the ICJ or ICC is not exclusive to any region or conflict. Their roles are tied to legal frameworks ratified by states and guided by international law.

specific to Israel, The ICC formally announced its investigation into alleged war crimes in the OPT in March 2021. This was based on Palestine's 2015 referral to the ICC and its recognition of the court’s jurisdiction under the Rome Statute, predating South Africa's more vocal role​.

Quote (WhiteSouned @ 23 Nov 2024 09:18)

Thanks for the clarification between ICC to ICJ.
The ICC have never issued a warrant against a western leader.
I’ve asked ChatGPT about it , here is the answer:
While there have been calls for ICC investigations into the actions of Western leaders—especially related to wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the broader "War on Terror"—the ICC has not issued arrest warrants against any Western leaders.
The lack of action is partly due to issues of jurisdiction, political considerations, and the U.S. and other Western nations' non-participation in the Rome Statute

Seems the UN and the ICC are enforcing law only where it’s easy. Now I do acknowledge that lack of enforcement does not mean that you can do as you please, it does however indicates on selective enforcement which is by definition flawed.
My point it that if you gonna prosecute prime ministers or countries, you might as well put them all in jail.

Quote

Act authorizes the president of the U.S. "to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court". The subsection (b) specifies this authority shall extend to "Covered United States persons" (defined as "members of the Armed Forces of the United States, elected or appointed officials of the United States Government, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the United States Government"[8]) and "Covered allied persons" (defined as "military personnel, elected or appointed officials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the government of a NATO member country, a major non-NATO ally including Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand"

Quote (Malopox @ Nov 23 2024 10:40am)

US has “Hague Invasion Act” that authorizes US government to invade The Netherlands to rescue any Americans indicted under ICC rules as well as suspend aid to countries prosecuting US Allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act



The act directly provides to rescue Netanyahu/Gallant if they ever get in trouble and somehow get arrested.

Quote (WhiteSouned @ Nov 23 2024 08:18am)

Thanks for the clarification between ICC to ICJ.
The ICC have never issued a warrant against a western leader.
I’ve asked ChatGPT about it , here is the answer:
While there have been calls for ICC investigations into the actions of Western leaders—especially related to wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the broader "War on Terror"—the ICC has not issued arrest warrants against any Western leaders.
The lack of action is partly due to issues of jurisdiction, political considerations, and the U.S. and other Western nations' non-participation in the Rome Statute

Seems the UN and the ICC are enforcing law only where it’s easy. Now I do acknowledge that lack of enforcement does not mean that you can do as you please, it does however indicates on selective enforcement which is by definition flawed.
My point it that if you gonna prosecute prime ministers or countries, you might as well put them all in jail.

Quote (Malopox @ Nov 23 2024 12:40am)

US has “Hague Invasion Act” that authorizes US government to invade The Netherlands to rescue any Americans indicted under ICC rules as well as suspend aid to countries prosecuting US Allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act



The act directly provides to rescue Netanyahu/Gallant if they ever get in trouble and somehow get arrested.

Quote (El1te @ Nov 23 2024 12:04pm)

They wouldn't do anything, because Trump's hawks would drop the hammer & shatter the ICC in whole

Quote (zorzin @ Nov 23 2024 10:35am)

If the Americans try that in northern mexico, we will burn their white house down again! When glorious leader Trudeau says he'll abide by the icc decision, the full weight of the Canadian army stands behind him, so Trump is clearly afraid and dont want no smoke.
Itll be 1812 all over again

Quote (El1te @ Nov 23 2024 08:43pm)

I'm honestly hoping Netanyahu does come here and Trudeau does have him arrested, because that's a clear pretense to annex us (please do)

Quote (El1te @ 23 Nov 2024 18:04)

In other words, the ICC is just posturing/issuing empty threats that aren't serious, they don't intend to take action. Same with other countries affirming the ICC decision. Netanyahu could land in Holland, walk up to the ICC, take a piss on their doorstep, and then leave. They wouldn't do anything, because Trump's hawks would drop the hammer & shatter the ICC in whole

Their intention is to bring attention to Israel's actions in the war - not a serious indictment