20-06-2002 21:05									#91
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

"They give the international community a rationale for neglecting the development of native justice systems in countries subject to them."

As their jurisdiction is of a subsidiary nature I don't see that. How yo they get neglected ? Should the US and EU say "we'll build you a nice local legal system"?

	20-06-2002 21:08									#92
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

"We have NO such obligation, we always did it because we felt it right and moralistic."

No obligation, indeed. But a bit of well-understood self-interest too, occasionally.

"But it's clear Europe wants to have a number of pan-national organizations handle everything from trade to peacekeeping, so I say fine, let them."

Only where IOs are useful. As for trade, the WTO was the result of the US and the EC getting tired of the low scale trade wars - both were behind its creation.

"You go your way, we will go ours, let's put an end to Nato"

Exactly.

	20-06-2002 21:10									#93
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Chris, isolationism doesn't work. It hurts more than it helps. We don't exist in a void, and we aren't powerful enough to engage in autarky. We depend on other countries around the world, and should engage them. Isolationism is never the answer and furthermore is hurtful to our economic interests, which DOES impact domestically.

I didn't say isolationism Imran, I said act only in our interests.

Make our own treaties, and handle our own buisness.

Europe can handle all the peacekeeping, all the overseas bases, all the economic problems, do all the condeming in the UN, in other words, we can go back to being a nation, just like before, and they can handle it.
We suck at it anyway, they can have it.

We will honor our treaties, same as always, but forget US dollars and US lives serving someone else's interests.

They can do THAT for themselves.

	20-06-2002 21:18									#94
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And if there is NO native justice system, then why should international criminals go free?

Let's look at a real case and not your prefered hypothetical: Rawanda. Rawanda permits the use of the death penalty for defendants prosecuted in Rawandan courts (Glory be! Yes, they actually do have a justice system. ), but the 150-200 of the most serious offenders have escaped this threat by virtue of being indicted by the ICTR.

	20-06-2002 21:20									#95
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: I didn't say isolationism Imran, I said act only in our interests.

NATO was in our interests, so is the WTO and World Bank. Most of the 'peacekeeping' is in our interests. We want stability in regions so, for example, our oil prices don't go through the roof.

Chris, it ALL ties in with our interests. Economically, we cannot continue to be successful if we pull away. Most of where we have gone in since the end of the Cold War has been to promote our interests across the world. We want a spread of democracy these days, because so we can gain more from trade.

quote: We will honor our treaties, same as always, but forget US dollars and US lives serving someone else's interests.

They hardly ever do... and we have broken many a treaty.

I don't think the US, as the Hegemon should look inwards and selfishly only go for its own interests. I think it should look at the big picture, and see that its long term interest is with a stable, prosperous world that requires US dollars and US lives to be spent now.

	20-06-2002 21:25									#96
	Put an end to popups!

quote: I didn't say isolationism Imran, I said act only in our interests. Make our own treaties, and handle our own buisness.

In other words: become a Rogue State(tm).

Why should others seek to do business with a nation that sees itself as exempt from international laws and obligations?

How would this not harm US economic interests?

Besides, if the US acts "only in its own interests" but is not isolationist: it can expect more terrorist attacks, and not just from Bin Laden. Power should either be used to benefit the world, or not used at all.

	20-06-2002 21:25									#97
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Let's look at a real case and not your prefered hypothetical: Rawanda. Rawanda permits the use of the death penalty for defendants prosecuted in Rawandan courts (Glory be! Yes, they actually do have a justice system. ), but the 150-200 of the most serious offenders have escaped this threat by virtue of being indicted by the ICTR.

And would these people actually be prosecuted in a Rawandan court? War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity aren't crimes that are national in scope. They are international crimes. It was seen by the international community that Rwanda was doing little to prosecute these people. Either they did not have the resources or the will, so the world decided to try these people for their crimes.

	20-06-2002 21:29									#98
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Either they did not have the resources or the will, so the world decided to try these people for their crimes.

[The existance International Tribunals] give the international community a rationale for neglecting the development of native justice systems in countries subject to them.

I think that you're making stuff up anyway.

	20-06-2002 21:35									#99
	Remove this text

I think you're making stuff up anyway too .

International Crimes should be dealt in International Courts. I know that they had to make concessions this time for national courts, but in the future, I hope that every War Crime or Crime Against Humanity that has been done systematically should be handled by the ICC first and **** the national courts.

	20-06-2002 21:35									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

There has been support for the Ruandan judiciary, but it lacks capacity and may be a bit one-sided. Apart from that you'd have to check how the cases of the International court devide by origin - IIRC there were several where it did not replace the ruandan jurisdiction but the universal jurisdiction of other nations.

	20-06-2002 21:37									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui NATO was in our interests, so is the WTO and World Bank. Most of the 'peacekeeping' is in our interests. We want stability in regions so, for example, our oil prices don't go through the roof.

Operative word is "was", and peacekeeping is NOT in our interest.
If an ally calls for help, fine.
Europe has a large population of adult males, they can stick their backsides out to dry as peacekeepers if it's so damned important.
As for fossil fuel prices, it's in our interests for the price to rise, because it would spur US industry to find alternative fuel sources to fossil fuel, thus making us less dependant on such a heavy polutant.

quote: Chris, it ALL ties in with our interests. Economically, we cannot continue to be successful if we pull away. Most of where we have gone in since the end of the Cold War has been to promote our interests across the world. We want a spread of democracy these days, because so we can gain more from trade.

I disagree.
It isn't in the US interest to support half-a$$ed dictators like Saudi Arabia and other fools because we trade with them, we should trade with all, and THEY can decide how to run their nations.
THAT'S in our interests.

quote: They hardly ever do... and we have broken many a treaty. I don't think the US, as the Hegemon should look inwards and selfishly only go for its own interests. I think it should look at the big picture, and see that its long term interest is with a stable, prosperous world that requires US dollars and US lives to be spent now.

Again, I don't agree.
Our European friends have all the answers, it's time for them to step up and perform, we will just reap the benifit of thier efforts, and not pay the price in blood and money.

	20-06-2002 21:49									#102
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Well then let's just agree to disagree, because I will never agree with you and you will never agree with me.

I think it is essential that we become even more internationalist than we are now.

	20-06-2002 21:53									#103
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Let the brave and powerful Dutch take over from America. There are a lot of Americans who simply do not like the idea of placing American troups under UN command regardless of the ICC.

	20-06-2002 21:56									#104
	Got spare money?

And there are a lot of American who thought voting for Al Gore was a good idea, what does that prove .

	20-06-2002 21:59									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: International Crimes should be dealt in International Courts.

How is a "crime" committed in a single nation state against only citizens of the same nation state an international crime? That would be sorta like the FBI announcing that, for example, if someone robbed a liquor store in Texas and didn't move across state lines, the FBI would still move in and take jurisdiction. That's ludicrous.

Rwanda was simply a civil war where lots of people died, but it's a damn good thing we didn't put troops in there and get some of them possibly killed.

	20-06-2002 22:03									#106
	Tired of ads?

quote: How is a "crime" committed in a single nation state against only citizens of the same nation state an international crime?

Because Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes are international crimes, banned by Geneva Conventions.

Your analogy is flawed. A better one would be the FBI announcing that if someone robbed a federal building and didn't move across state lines, the FBI would move in and take jurisdiction.

	20-06-2002 22:07									#107
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 As for fossil fuel prices, it's in our interests for the price to rise, because it would spur US industry to find alternative fuel sources to fossil fuel, thus making us less dependant on such a heavy polutant.

Really? I was under the impression that the oil companies were holding back all those alternative fuels .

	20-06-2002 22:24									#108
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Because Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes are international crimes, banned by Geneva Conventions.

Good point, but again, the Geneva Convention has no enforcement mechanism, and no court set up by the treaty. If the treaty had done that, most nations probably wouldn't have signed it.

Further, the application of "crimes against humanity" is bullshit - how can Milosevic or Japanese General Yamashita be considered criminals but people like Truman and FDR and Curtis LeMay not be? They all ordered the murder of civilians, except the Americans did it in a far larger scale.

	20-06-2002 22:26									#109
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The court is the enforcement mechanism now .

So go away.

	20-06-2002 22:29									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: The court is the enforcement mechanism now

Yes, but the actual treaty didn't set it up, and if it had, my point is that most nations probably would not have signed onto it, especially at that point in history.

Further, you still haven't answered my other objection - basic fairness of the the application of international laws.

	20-06-2002 22:33									#111
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

So what if the actual treaty didn't set it up! The US Constitution never set up judicial review!

The fairness of the application of international laws is the same as the fairness of application of domestic laws. The reason American weren't tried is because they set up that court. Would you rather have that? Ad hoc courts set up by members that won't be tried? Or would you rather have a permanent court that can try whoever does commit the war crimes (whatever side they are on).

	20-06-2002 22:33									#112
	Full PM-box? Change here!

"I was under the impression that the oil companies were holding back all those alternative fuels"

How could they?

	20-06-2002 22:37									#113
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Extreme muscle strength.

	20-06-2002 22:44									#114
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Overrated. Only 2 oil producers are in the top 50 of the Fortune 500 nowadays. They should be losing influence, comparatively speaking.

	20-06-2002 22:46									#115
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Dan, John was making a joke. Lighten up a bit .

	20-06-2002 22:49									#116
	Remove this text

You will follow my threadjack or else.

	20-06-2002 22:49									#117
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DanS Only 2 oil producers are in the top 50 of the Fortune 500 nowadays.

I didn't know they compose the list along that criterion.

	20-06-2002 22:52									#118
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS "I was under the impression that the oil companies were holding back all those alternative fuels" How could they?

Oh i don't know, maybe bush = oil companies. They are trying everything they can to hold back the development of other sources of fuel. Have you looked at just how much of the US economy depends on oil and oil by products? If a cheap alternitive where found the US economy would go into a tailspin, simply because you'd have millions of unskilled workers removed from the workforce which would lead extremely high unemployment. The cost of plastics would sky rocket etc etc etc

	20-06-2002 23:19									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: There is a long tradtion of requiring mariners to assist those in distress, Imran. Go read up on this area and you may feeel different. Now can you tell me where it is in the Rome Statute? Stop evading the question and put your money where you mouth is. The ICC is based on the Rome Statute. Quote for me the section where it says the ICC can prosecute for that (which isn't a War Crime or a Crime against Humanity, and definetly ISN'T systematic or repeated).

the rome statute has overarching language such as crimes against humanity. It can try people for other than codified offenses. This means there is a buttload of wiggle room.

	20-06-2002 23:27									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Roland GP: "The Euros all have the "little brother complex"." Seems more like some Yanks have a severe younger brother complex. Why this need for permament self-aggrandization ? "(like a teenager questioning a parent.)" No, like a divorce in the making. "I just tak em at that and ditcht the childish attitude of looking for perfection..." If you hadn't an entire industry busy telling yourself and us foreigners how great you are, we'd care a lot less.

You've got this totally wierd thing going on, Roland. Why don't you at least visit the object of your fascination? just amazes me that a professional like yourself has never jumped over the puddle...