Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This isn't news. At all.

The United States does not, and never has, recognized the International Criminal Court. To the point that they will not bat an eye and declare war on the Netherlands in case a American soldier will be held in jail in The Hague for questioning and appearing before the Court.

And this actually is nothing new and predates the Trump presidency FOR YEARS (17 to be exact):

The "Hague Invasion Act" like Pizza mentioned below or "American Service-Members' Protection Act" which is its official name was signed into law by W on August 2, 2002 and upheld ever since -- yes, even throughout the Obama era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot...

EDIT: -1 for facts? That's new.




As it should be. It's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over people who have not consented to it through the establishment of a constitution, legislative controls, and shared ideals that hold that power as authoritative. The idea that anyone would just come into our country and demand that we consent to their understanding of justice, rights, etc. is absurd.

Now, switching topics entirely, are you guys all on board with this American-led push for the opposition leader in Venezuela? Also, how are things in Syria and Yemen these days? Libya? Iraq? Afghanistan? Just curious.


> As it should be. It's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over people who have not consented to it through the establishment of a constitution, legislative controls, and shared ideals that hold that power as authoritative.

The US should not multilaterally accept the prosecution of war crimes because it's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over people? That makes no sense.

On top of that, the US doesn't even agree with your position, because the US was the primary driver behind the Nuremberg trials to prosecute German war criminals after WW2, despite Germany not having consented to it through the establishment of a constitution, legislative controls or shared ideals.


Can people not simultaneously be against the ICC and US imperialism?


So it's OK for the US to commit war crimes but not for anyone else?

Who polices the self proclaimed police men of the world?


It's a simple matter of might makes right. Nobody has the power to hold the US or its war criminals accountable, but the US does have the power to hold other countries and their war criminals accountable.

That's simply how this works. There's simply no moral or legal justification for the US's stance towards the ICC compared to their stance in the Nuremberg trials. America's power is the only thing that justifies it.


You can state the facts without making a judgment in passing ("This isn't news. At all.")

To clarify my comment: saying "this isn't news" is akin to downvoting for disagreement. It questions the conversation itself.

The article is stating a fact too; we can discuss its implications, making judgments freely.


They will certainly not declare war, but conduct a covert operation.

(And I hope their special forces get killed and the ship they launched from is sunk.)


Covert operation could happen but would be extremely difficult to execute in practice:

The Hague is where the government of The Netherlands is located. The HQ of the Dutch Military Intelligence Services is at walking distance of the ICC at a military barracks called the Frederikskazerne. And the ICC itselves is located in the International Zone, one of the most heavily guarded and surveilled locations of the Netherlands.


I wonder if that would trigger NATO's article 5 again. Just like when Afghanistan attacked the United St... wait, they didn't.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: