Current Affairs Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
The binman chronicles said:
Amazing whataboutery, my point was and is IF they had done what Putin has done they would have been tried. There is a clear distinction between the two and it's not like the country from which they came from is the key for being put on trial or not.

The mechanics of the rest of the argument you are trying to make doesn't come into it. If you want to discuss that, in hindsight the war was clearly wrong, should they have been tried for it...maybe. One thing I don't remember for Russia's war with Ukraine was a load of broken UN security resolutions, backing Russia with general consensus that something had to be done about the Ukrainian leader. That whether you or I or anyone else likes it gave some credibility to the action, thus kept them from being arrested.
Click to expand...

No, they wouldn't have. The Yanks would never surrender Bush to an international court; they don't even do that with foreign national courts where there are junior people involved in crystal clear cases of wrongdoing (the idiots who killed twenty people at Cavalese for example, or Raymond Allen Davis, or Anne Sacoolas, or the commander of the Vincennes). He could have nuked Baghdad and they would never have turned him over to the ICC.

As for the rest, all I would say there is that there was no general consensus or UN resolution saying that invading Iraq would be justified, nor was there an imminent threat to any other nation. It was a crime just as the invasion of Ukraine is, and both crimes require the same level of commitment.
 
tsubaki said:
No, they wouldn't have. The Yanks would never surrender Bush to an international court; they don't even do that with foreign national courts where there are junior people involved in crystal clear cases of wrongdoing (the idiots who killed twenty people at Cavalese for example, or Raymond Allen Davis, or Anne Sacoolas, or the commander of the Vincennes). He could have nuked Baghdad and they would never have turned him over to the ICC.

As for the rest, all I would say there is that there was no general consensus or UN resolution saying that invading Iraq would be justified, nor was there an imminent threat to any other nation. It was a crime just as the invasion of Ukraine is, and both crimes require the same level of commitment.
Click to expand...
Agreed. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Guess who contributes the most to the ICC and who contributes nothing...

Didn't we see the same with the WHO during the lockdown defending China's policies because the US under Trump pulled funding. These institutions are all paid and bought. That's how it works ...
 
Toffee_Loaf said:
Agreed. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Guess who contributes the most to the ICC and who contributes nothing...

Didn't we see the same with the WHO during the lockdown defending China's policies because the US under Trump pulled funding. These institutions are all paid and bought. That's how it works ...
Click to expand...

er - no

The WHO is a great idea but it is ruined by national interests, much like the ICC is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top