Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
First off we aren't a "super power", we are the sole "hyper power". We stand alone, those at the top always do.
|
I don't see what your super hyper mega ultra-ness has to do with the topic at hand, enlighten me.
Quote:
|
Secondly if people here don't think there is anything wrong or at least questionable with the ICC in regards to how it undermines sovereignity and authority, there is no discussion to be had.
|
Not at all. All bases seem to have been covered and people from both sides have given some concise, well thought out opinions. I for one have enjoyed being part of the debate, and I don't see how you can dismiss the discussion entirely just because people don't subscribe to your view.
Quote:
|
It's not that there is something to hide, it's just that basically this ICC equates to what is effectively what the left fears the Patriot Act does to America. Why should we submit our own sovereign people and elected officials to the wills of an appointed court, a court selected by a bureaucracy that at best is unfavorable to American policy? An appointed court that has no accountability to those that it rules over. It would literally be a spit in the face to constants of our own (American) justice system.
|
This has already been dealt with. All invloved countries are bound by and accept the same terms. French troops (to use them as an example) would be just as susceptible to prosecution as American troops, and likewise I'm sure there would be outcry in France if this were ever to happen. The fact is that this wouldn't matter one iota, because of the binding terms of the treaty. I for one am confident of the courts ability to consider cases with the impartiality required of it, regardless of which nation those facing prosecution call home.
Also, the amount of verbal spin some people put on relatively simple situations irritates me. We all know that France and America don't see eye to eye and that diplomatic relations are not wonderful between all nations in the world, but what I fail to see is how this detracts from the credibility of an international court where the voice of each nation is equally audible?