| ▲ | MadrasThorn 2 hours ago |
| Trump attacking the Netherlands means transatlanticism is really dead. I think this has a lot to do with how the case against Putin was built and Trump used his influence to disrupt it. |
|
| ▲ | ParentiSoundSys an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| It's because the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu for committing war crimes. |
| |
| ▲ | jonnybgood an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | The US had issue with the ICC since it first began in 2002. Multiple administrations saw it as a problem. | | |
| ▲ | b5n 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Taking issue with accountability is a long lived American tradition enjoyed predominantly by those with wealth/power. | |
| ▲ | sickofparadox an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | The year the ICC was established, Congress passed a law providing enduring authorization for a full scale military invasion of the Netherlands should the ICC imprison any US service member, government employee, or those of allied nations (including Israel).[1] It even prevents any level of the US government (local, state, or federal) from working to assist the ICC. Americans do not want to be beholden to a foreign court. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr... |
| |
| ▲ | MadrasThorn an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm probably wrong but I could have sworn there was an article that came out when Trump was elected something happened with data on microsoft accounts/server huh. I guess it's ungoogable right now. Might have just been hosted by US gov. Must have been funding related. Anyway I don't support ICC grabbing power it does not have over other countries who do not sign on. If the ICC wanted to be consistent they should target Hamas leaders, Iranian leaders, ect | | |
| ▲ | input_sh 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You'd be happy to know that ICC has also indicted three Hamas leaders (Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif, Ismail Haniyeh). Granted all three were withdrawn because their deaths were confirmed, but you're presenting it as if ICC only indicted Israeli leaders, which is not the case. | | |
| ▲ | MadrasThorn 10 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I am happy to know they are at least somewhat consistent however unfortunately it still doesn't change my position on it. I am wondering if every war time leader should expect an ICC indictment. |
| |
| ▲ | petre an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > If the ICC wanted to be consistent they should target Hamas leaders, Iranian leaders, ect Iran is not a party to the Rome Statute and the court has not opened an official case against Iranian officials. However, the ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, Commander-in-Chief of Hamas's military wing for war crimes and crimes against humanity stemming from the October 7 attacks. |
| |
| ▲ | antonvs an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | And because Trump and co don't want to have to deal with such warrants against themselves. It's the ultimate expression of US corruption. There's not even a pretense of fighting for justice any more, just fighting justice. |
|
|
| ▲ | rapsey an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The EU is entirely subjugated to the US. No energy independence, militaries falling apart and out of date, no tech development or investment. |
| |
| ▲ | mittensc an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Maybe that's wrong? The US can't even win a war in the middle east without NATO What is the US going to do when China starts making their own moves? | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > The US can't even win a war in the middle east without NATO That is false. The US could win a war in the middle east without NATO. The US has consistently chosen not to attempt to do so, but there is every reason to think they could. It is good that the US mostly tries to work with NATO on the middle east (and bad that Trump has not). The US has also consistently chosen to send minimal ground forces, and when they do send them they are very careful to protect the lives of their soldiers at the expense of winning. However there remains every reason to think the US could make different decisions and win wars in the middle east alone. | |
| ▲ | rapsey an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Outside the US, NATO countries have very little power projection capabilities. A bit of france, a bit of UK and then nothing. | | |
| ▲ | mittensc an hour ago | parent [-] | | How's that power projection working in Iran/Yemen? Would NATO change the equation? | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The US has chosen not to project all the power they can. That is send soldiers - likely some to die. However the US has the ability to send them if they want, and could supply them if they did - nobody else has anywhere near that ability ready today. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | flohofwoe an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | The tricky thing these days is trying to figure out whether messages like this are coming from Russian or MAGA bots ;) In any case, good work comrade! Here's your potato / Trumpcoin. Now back into your troll cave. |
|
