Foundations laid for tribunal to try Putin for Ukraine invasion, EU says
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
International law is such a fucking joke. Why do they even bother with this performative bs? Stop wasting money on this nonsense.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Most of us are still operating under the assumption that rules still matter, even tho there is proof they don't.
It's hard to turn one's back on order when chaos is screaming in our faces.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I agree that this will have no real-world effects on Putin, but I do think this is important for the sake of documentation.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Here’s the thing, even when we had order international law was a joke. The only reason laws work within a country is because the state can hold you accountable through violence if necessary. For a country or group of countries to be able to enforce their laws on other countries is through war. If you are not willing to go to war, you should not be engaging in this theater.,
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Any second now, Israel will withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza in compliance with the ICJ ruling deadline of September 2025.
A plane will also shortly be landing in the Hague where Israeli police will hand the war criminal Netanyahu to Dutch autjorities pursuant the ICC arrest warrant.
One of the handful of times the Zionists haven't lied is when they say international law doesn't matter.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Except caring about ethicality of the conduct of countries is great.
What's not so great is that the county that pitched the idea then withdrew itself from its justification after it was realized.
But as an ideological beacon of jurisprudence we should all aspire to it's pretty cheap and much more worthwhile than wars on drugs, porn and abortion.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
for nearly three years lawyers have wrangled over finding the right courtroom.
It needs to be big enough for the masses to enjoy the hanging.
I suggest we do it outside though. That way we can have him rot away in the open.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
It’s meaningless unless everyone is in on it, willing to be held to it and willing to go to war to enforce whatever ethical standards have been agreed. It’s pure theater.
And I didn’t know that it was a choice between international law and meddling in the lives of individuals.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
That's rather silly. If jurisprudence would only work if everyone was in on it there wouldn't be any.
'it says in your lawbook that killing is illegal, yet Mr Dahmer here disagrees, so it's of the table'
Law is ingrained with our culture and it's the shitty fact of life that it's perennially imperfect as people always try to skirt it or circumvent it. That doesn't mean it's meaningless.
I don't know how you came up with the meddling in the lives of individuals bit, though.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
There won't be a hanging, nor any other form of execution. We don't do that here. It's uncivilised, it's brutal, and it's unnecessary.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
The situation you describe is different and actually proves my point because Mr. Dahmer, presumably lives in a nation, and in that nation in which he lives there must be some form of state or organization that is imposing that law. Even if he disagrees they can impose the law on him through some form of force. He can run, he can fight, but the organization is bigger and thus more powerful than him and as such can make him follow the law or force him to face the consequences. See also why billionaires may be above the law in some places: they are individually richer and more powerful than the organization that would hold them accountable.
On the international level, if a group of nations declare that invading other countries is a crime but 1 of them disagrees and starts an invasion, the crime can only be punished by force, ie war. You could impose penalties on them too, which is a type of force or power, but look at Russia to see how effective they are.