3 ms·

Risk of War Crimes Charges for U.S. Grows over Saudi Strikes in Yemen

59 points by AndrewBissell 6y ago

Natsu 6y ago
It's amazing to me how the people who discovered this problem did so when they no longer had to deal with it.
vagrantJin 6y ago
The only line that measures up to reality. No one is going to bring up the issue of war crimes against the US since that would open a can of worms. "Although there has been no move so far by any foreign court to do so"
- lumost 6y ago
  A number of foreign governments are likely holding it as a bargaining chip in other foreign policy matters. Given the involvement of 4/5ths of the UN Security council in middle eastern wars over the last decade, there is good chance that once the charges come out - every power will have some criminal activity to account for. This is unlikely to be a permanent situation, half the EU block, China, Japan, India, and Brazil have had minor involvement in any war in the last 2 decades. I doubt that people in those countries would look fondly on what has occurred if it was ever made an issue.
darksaints 6y ago
I've been saying for years that the US' non-cooperation with the ICC is a ticking time bomb. Our country has hundreds, if not thousands of people that could potentially serve life sentences for war crimes. Some of them soldiers and police, some of them lower level officials, some of them senior level officials, and some of them presidents. The US has passed laws effectively declaring war in advance on The Hague and any country that works to indict American citizens in the ICC. But it's pretty damn easy to call our bluff. What lengths would they really go to protect 0.0001% of our population from facing justice for permanently maiming, torturing, and killing thousands of innocent non-combatants? Would we be willing to face losing our NATO allies? Being excluded from the G7/G20? Would we be willing to face trade sanctions, crippling our entire economy? We can wag our big american dicks about, but no political party could survive those sorts of international punishments, let alone sacrificing American lives to protect murderers. And it's just a matter of time before someone really calls our bluff and does something about it.
- shaftoe 6y ago
  None of that is going to happen, for the same reason China can put an entire people into death camps and Russia can just take land from Ukraine. Power comes from the barrel of a gun.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    And it's not a coincidence here that China and Russia are also not members of the ICC.
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      True. Oceania and Eastasia, if not quite Eurasia. Looks like russia withdrew its signature after the US had, and china never signed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_parties_to_the_Rome_Statute_of_the_International_Criminal_Court https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_parties_to_the_Rome_Sta...
  - Aeolun 6y ago
    The last argument of kings.
- IkmoIkmo 6y ago
  Similarly, unfortunately it is also unlikely that the rest of the world magically bands together against the US (bearing all the economic and political consequences, which would be significant for all parties), for the sake of prosecuting 0.0001% of US population. As a European I don't expect the bluff to be called anytime soon.
  - darksaints 6y ago
    The US has already worn out the worst possible threat it can make: war. After decades of endless war, we ended up with an attempt at war with Iran by a childish buffoon that doesn't think twice about anything. And he backed down. Not because he was convinced by the threat of an opposing political party voting him out, but because he was convinced by the threat of his own war-mongering republican party voting him out. Americans no longer have any appetite for war, and threatening war is now political suicide. Mind you, that threat of war with Iran was because of attacks on American soldiers. Do you really think the average American gives two shits about Gina Haspel, or Bruce Jessen, or Edward Gallagher? Enough to send their kids to war to protect them from prison?
rdudekul 6y ago
There is an apathy around bombing civilians in Islamic countries, especially if done by another Islamic country. It is considered just a matter of business/strategy to supply weapons to Saudi Arabia, even when the extent of Human rights violations there are fully known. This problem can be resolved only when there is a broad recognition that all Humans are equal, regardless of religion, caste etc.
- ReptileMan 6y ago
  On the other hand interventions turned 2 Islamic countries from otherwise stable entities into total disasters. Syria, Lybia are failed states. If Gaddafi and Assad were allowed to deal with the crisis it would have been all over by now with less death toll. Egypt escaped their fate narrowly just because the military took control.
  - Ericson2314 6y ago
    You may not like Morsi but he was not running a failed state. Ugh, can we not be against both wanton foreign intervention and backing military juntas?
    - ReptileMan 6y ago
      Egypt was going downhill. You can be against whatever you wish. Real world takes precedence. Once you cry havoc and unleash the dogs of war all bets are off. The us has had successful state building with Germany Japan and South Korea and totally failed with Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. And the whole Latin America is... complicated. In hindsight the proper solutions are aplenty, but so far how to intervene or whether is a cointoss for the outcome.
  - yyyk 6y ago
    What happened in Syria was precisely the result of allowing Assad to 'deal with the crisis'.
    - ReptileMan 6y ago
pfdietz 6y ago
War crimes charges are also possible against former US presidents, if they ever travel overseas. I could see a president of the opposing party not doing a damned thing if a former president of the other party is nabbed for this, and US courts would have no say in the matter.
Aeolun 6y ago
Even if they are charged with war crimes, who is going to hold them accountable?
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  Countries should simply sanction these individual criminals. We do the same thing against war lords and terrorists such as the Lukashenko mob (unfortunately the EU lacks balls to actually sanction Lukashenko himself). If they get away with these crimes back home that's sad, but they should no longer be allowed to sip a coffee in Rome or have their wives go shopping in Paris (or visit their bank in Cyprus or Malta). This tactic works without the usual damage associated with economic sanctions. Let's start with Bannon so he is no longer able to travel around Europe to give talks on strategy in front of local alt-right groups, or people like Eric Prince, Peter Thiel, and similar human scum. For sure the list would be long.
  - fmajid 6y ago
    The US is applying financial sanctions... against ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.
  - AndrewBissell 6y ago
    George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, David Frum, and Gina Haspel have all had far more negative impact and are responsible for much more in the way of war crimes than Bannon.
  - klipklop 6y ago
    What war crimes did Bannon commit? Seems like an odd choice to target.
Synaesthesia 6y ago
The Iraq war was a war crime, by the Nuremberg standards, it's aggression.
jrimbault 6y ago
dang, I think this has been flagged by error. (I'm being candid)

59 points by AndrewBissell 6y ago

It's amazing to me how the people who discovered this problem did so when they no longer had to deal with it.

The only line that measures up to reality. No one is going to bring up the issue of war crimes against the US since that would open a can of worms. "Although there has been no move so far by any foreign court to do so"

lumost 6y ago
A number of foreign governments are likely holding it as a bargaining chip in other foreign policy matters. Given the involvement of 4/5ths of the UN Security council in middle eastern wars over the last decade, there is good chance that once the charges come out - every power will have some criminal activity to account for. This is unlikely to be a permanent situation, half the EU block, China, Japan, India, and Brazil have had minor involvement in any war in the last 2 decades. I doubt that people in those countries would look fondly on what has occurred if it was ever made an issue.

darksaints 6y ago

I've been saying for years that the US' non-cooperation with the ICC is a ticking time bomb. Our country has hundreds, if not thousands of people that could potentially serve life sentences for war crimes. Some of them soldiers and police, some of them lower level officials, some of them senior level officials, and some of them presidents. The US has passed laws effectively declaring war in advance on The Hague and any country that works to indict American citizens in the ICC. But it's pretty damn easy to call our bluff. What lengths would they really go to protect 0.0001% of our population from facing justice for permanently maiming, torturing, and killing thousands of innocent non-combatants? Would we be willing to face losing our NATO allies? Being excluded from the G7/G20? Would we be willing to face trade sanctions, crippling our entire economy? We can wag our big american dicks about, but no political party could survive those sorts of international punishments, let alone sacrificing American lives to protect murderers. And it's just a matter of time before someone really calls our bluff and does something about it.

shaftoe 6y ago
None of that is going to happen, for the same reason China can put an entire people into death camps and Russia can just take land from Ukraine. Power comes from the barrel of a gun.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  And it's not a coincidence here that China and Russia are also not members of the ICC.
  - 082349872349872 6y ago
    True. Oceania and Eastasia, if not quite Eurasia. Looks like russia withdrew its signature after the US had, and china never signed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_parties_to_the_Rome_Statute_of_the_International_Criminal_Court https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_parties_to_the_Rome_Sta...
- Aeolun 6y ago
  The last argument of kings.
IkmoIkmo 6y ago
Similarly, unfortunately it is also unlikely that the rest of the world magically bands together against the US (bearing all the economic and political consequences, which would be significant for all parties), for the sake of prosecuting 0.0001% of US population. As a European I don't expect the bluff to be called anytime soon.
- darksaints 6y ago
  The US has already worn out the worst possible threat it can make: war. After decades of endless war, we ended up with an attempt at war with Iran by a childish buffoon that doesn't think twice about anything. And he backed down. Not because he was convinced by the threat of an opposing political party voting him out, but because he was convinced by the threat of his own war-mongering republican party voting him out. Americans no longer have any appetite for war, and threatening war is now political suicide. Mind you, that threat of war with Iran was because of attacks on American soldiers. Do you really think the average American gives two shits about Gina Haspel, or Bruce Jessen, or Edward Gallagher? Enough to send their kids to war to protect them from prison?

rdudekul 6y ago

There is an apathy around bombing civilians in Islamic countries, especially if done by another Islamic country. It is considered just a matter of business/strategy to supply weapons to Saudi Arabia, even when the extent of Human rights violations there are fully known. This problem can be resolved only when there is a broad recognition that all Humans are equal, regardless of religion, caste etc.

ReptileMan 6y ago
On the other hand interventions turned 2 Islamic countries from otherwise stable entities into total disasters. Syria, Lybia are failed states. If Gaddafi and Assad were allowed to deal with the crisis it would have been all over by now with less death toll. Egypt escaped their fate narrowly just because the military took control.
- Ericson2314 6y ago
  You may not like Morsi but he was not running a failed state. Ugh, can we not be against both wanton foreign intervention and backing military juntas?
  - ReptileMan 6y ago
    Egypt was going downhill. You can be against whatever you wish. Real world takes precedence. Once you cry havoc and unleash the dogs of war all bets are off. The us has had successful state building with Germany Japan and South Korea and totally failed with Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. And the whole Latin America is... complicated. In hindsight the proper solutions are aplenty, but so far how to intervene or whether is a cointoss for the outcome.
- yyyk 6y ago
  What happened in Syria was precisely the result of allowing Assad to 'deal with the crisis'.
  - ReptileMan 6y ago

pfdietz 6y ago

War crimes charges are also possible against former US presidents, if they ever travel overseas. I could see a president of the opposing party not doing a damned thing if a former president of the other party is nabbed for this, and US courts would have no say in the matter.

Aeolun 6y ago

Even if they are charged with war crimes, who is going to hold them accountable?

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
Countries should simply sanction these individual criminals. We do the same thing against war lords and terrorists such as the Lukashenko mob (unfortunately the EU lacks balls to actually sanction Lukashenko himself). If they get away with these crimes back home that's sad, but they should no longer be allowed to sip a coffee in Rome or have their wives go shopping in Paris (or visit their bank in Cyprus or Malta). This tactic works without the usual damage associated with economic sanctions. Let's start with Bannon so he is no longer able to travel around Europe to give talks on strategy in front of local alt-right groups, or people like Eric Prince, Peter Thiel, and similar human scum. For sure the list would be long.
- fmajid 6y ago
  The US is applying financial sanctions... against ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.
- AndrewBissell 6y ago
  George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, David Frum, and Gina Haspel have all had far more negative impact and are responsible for much more in the way of war crimes than Bannon.
- klipklop 6y ago
  What war crimes did Bannon commit? Seems like an odd choice to target.

Synaesthesia 6y ago

The Iraq war was a war crime, by the Nuremberg standards, it's aggression.

jrimbault 6y ago

dang, I think this has been flagged by error. (I'm being candid)