Winston Churchill suggested to Stalin the possibility of the Pope 's being associated with some of the decisions taken. "The Pope," said Stalin. "The Pope. How many divisions has he?"Stalin was a cold sonofabitch, but he sometimes summed things up. And so to the news of this day:
On 5 March 2020, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court decided unanimously to authorise the Prosecutor to commence an investigation into alleged crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court in relation to the situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.Not found in the statement at that link are the words "United", "States", "Military", or "Forces", but we all know that this is precisely the focus of the ICC. And so to the USA's chief diplomat, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo:
This is a truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable political institution, masquerading as a legal body ... "He went on to refer to the ICC as a "renegade, unlawful so-called court." He captured the ICC situation in precisely the manner that Stalin did the Pope. Big hat, no cattle. And this is America's chief diplomat. Well done. Quite frankly, this is an act of war. Replying with contempt is an entirely appropriate first step. But it is only the first if the ICC doesn't walk this back tout suite.
For the next step, how about barring entry to the USA to all ICC employees and their families? If you need a further next step, applying international financial sanctions to ICC employees seems appropriate. It's certainly more proportional than shooting at them. But these stuffed shirts need to get a more realistic sense of their place in the world.
7 comments:
Overstepping once again... Time for the ICC to become a footnote in the history books!
A while back, I did the math, just for grins. There are about a billion Catholics alive on earth. If you add all the Orthodox and the Protestants to the ranks of the Church Militant, I'd imagine that number about doubles. We can't really know how large the great Cloud of Witnesses is, but it's got to be substantial. The Church Triumphant provides a base of fire that the powers of this world can't even assail, much less overcome.
For the sake of using round numbers, let's say a division numbers about twenty thousand souls. One billion divided by twenty thousand gives us fifty thousand divisions. So, even if every other Christian is too mired in sin and doubt to get in the fight, Stalin's snark is terminal myopia talking.
The US specifically has a "Bomb the Hague" law in place just for this. Yes, internationalists with their panties in a wad are all a-flutter at the US during the presidencies of Bush, BushII and Trump. Yet these same internationalists were mum with joy during the reigns of the despotic Clintons (what? you thought he thought for himself? hahahaha, you funny) and Obama.
Like the stupid "Princess Diana got killed so we must ban landmines" international law. Which the US did not sign. At least we aren't openly lying.
Screw the internationalists. To the wall. And practice the Blood Eagle while the Hague and other internationalist courts burn. This goes for the UN, too. There are better things we could use the land for, like a toxic waste dump - which would be far less poisonous and better for the environment and not waste nearly as much money.
I think the first time the ICC indicts any American officer for war crimes will be the last with our current president. If they put out any of their peculiar reports about us making war wrong I think Trump will find a way to hurt them to death.
Do you mean that the US invading random countries in the Middle East has been lawful?! Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and by proxy Syria? Seriously? Y'all don't even bother to declare war, you just kick over random sand castles that aren't yours, for reasons ranging from weak to nonexistent.
We know where they are so we can drone them with little danger of collateral damage.
Can you disconnect the dysfunctional CAPTCHA. Please.
Brad, that may be true, but just highlights that "International Law" is a bit of an oxymoron. The ICC is trying to enforce something that they can't enforce.
Richard, I can't remove the CAPTCHA, sorry. There was a flood of Spam comments (> 100/day) before I put it up. :-p
Post a Comment