08-07-2002 20:18									#361
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

"The Euro's are consistently not cooperating with the US in prosecuting criminals becuase we have the death penalty."

Which is exactly reflected in the US government being under no obligation to cooperate with the ICC unless it joins.

"You particularly protest if the person being "executed" is a citizen of a European country."

"Protest" is part of consular protection. Lobbying, whining, screaming, whatever. But that's it.

Accordingly in the Singapore case there was no further intervention. There is none wrt US citizens in Saudi Arabia's pseudo-courts. The list is endless. To suggest use of force against the ICC is not only illegal and absurd, it also a bizarre choice of target.

	08-07-2002 20:22									#362
	Inflate your Upload Space

"Does that mean that we can take France and Germany before the World Court for interfering with a lawful prosecution?"

Not interfering. Just "not aiding". No obligation to do that.

So no, but you can ***** about to your heart's desire.

PS:
US WW I - there were many motives, from trade, debts, missionary zeal to national pride and the submarine issues. Protecting US citizens was if at all just a small aspect.

	08-07-2002 20:26									#363
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

The Zimmermen note didn't help.

Roland, you guys are STILL on about this?

Forget it, it will never get passed Jesse Helms.

	08-07-2002 20:26									#364
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Roland PS: US WW I - there were many motives, from trade, debts, missionary zeal to national pride and the submarine issues. Protecting US citizens was if at all just a small aspect.

I always thought that it was the Zimmerman telegraph that broke the camel's back in this instance.

	08-07-2002 20:29									#365
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The Zimmermann note was quite absurd. Absent other motives, the US should have laughed its collective ass off about it.

	08-07-2002 20:38									#366
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

If the Germans had not sunk the Lusitania, there would have been no US involvment in WWI and Germany and Austria would have won WWI.

	08-07-2002 20:41									#367
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Most likely been a draw.

The Lusitania thing got a lot of hype. IIRC it is now established that it carried military cargo, but I'm sure Chris knows more about that.

	08-07-2002 21:22									#368
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Germany was already losing WW1 before the US showed up. The Germans clearly, couldn't keep up the way it was going. American involvement merely sped up this process.

	08-07-2002 21:31									#369
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Germany was already losing WW1 before the US showed up. The Germans clearly, couldn't keep up the way it was going. American involvement merely sped up this process.

What are you nuts?! When the Americans entered the war, the French troops with about to mutiny. That is why the US sent small detachments of troops to the front line to bolster the French and make sure they didn't just mutiny and hand Germany the war!

	08-07-2002 21:35									#370
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Forget it, it will never get passed Jesse Helms.

He's retiring .

	08-07-2002 22:22									#371
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Roland The Lusitania thing got a lot of hype. IIRC it is now established that it carried military cargo, but I'm sure Chris knows more about that.

It was loaded with munitions, in direct violation of neutrality laws.

The German foriegn office ran ads right next to it's sailing annoucements saying plainly that any British ship was fair game, and that they would attack it.

She sank quickly mainly because the ammo ignited the coal bunkers, blowing out half her bow.

Imran:

Thank god.

	08-07-2002 22:32									#372
	Put an end to popups!

And under the rules back than, even a neutral flag would not protect military supplies.

The legal problem was with submarine warfare (unclear), and the german declaration of a war zone (in retaliation for the UK's illegal distance blockade of Germany).

	08-07-2002 22:37									#373
	Got spare money?

A real problem was caused by Britain.

It had been established by treaty that a merchant ship, if caught by a sub, would be given time to be abandoned, BUT, said ship WAS NOT allowed to radio what had happened.

The British ignored this and reported attacks, leaving the U-boats no choice but to strike without warning.

Britain's blockade also extended to neutral shipping (in violation of international law) on the grounds that they might be helping the Central powers.

Britain carried the illeagal blocade into 1919, forcing the Germans to sign the unfair Versallias treaty or watch their people die of starvation.

	09-07-2002 07:49									#374
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Chris, I don't believe England sank any US ships or killed any US citizens. Did they?

One can talk legalities all one wants, but the bottom line is that the Germans killed US citizens - a lot of them - in 1915. This put us on edge. Two years later, after promising not to harras US ships, it declared unlimited submarine warfare which allegedly gave them the "legal" right to kill US citizens.

We were outraged, and justifiably so.

On the outcome, I agree with you Roland that both sides may have called it a draw in 1918 if the US had not entered the war. We forget that in order to win the war, Germany would still have had to invade England even if it managed to knock France out of the war.

	09-07-2002 09:26									#375
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ned Chris, I don't believe England sank any US ships or killed any US citizens. Did they? One can talk legalities all one wants, but the bottom line is that the Germans killed US citizens - a lot of them - in 1915. This put us on edge. Two years later, after promising not to harras US ships, it declared unlimited submarine warfare which allegedly gave them the "legal" right to kill US citizens. We were outraged, and justifiably so. On the outcome, I agree with you Roland that both sides may have called it a draw in 1918 if the US had not entered the war. We forget that in order to win the war, Germany would still have had to invade England even if it managed to knock France out of the war.

Only slightly more American shipping was sunk by U-Boats than was sunk by British mines prior to Wilson's ultimatum.

	09-07-2002 10:18									#376
	Got spare money?

If the Brit battleships deliberately shelled US flag vessels on the high seas, we would have been just as mad at them. I don't recall any such incident, though.

	09-07-2002 12:53									#377
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Ned:

"but the bottom line is that the Germans killed US citizens - a lot of them - in 1915.... allegedly gave them the "legal" right to kill US citizens."

Bollocks. Germany just said "stay out of the warzone". That's like *****ing about Americans getting killed while taking a walk in the Flanders countryside in 1917.

	09-07-2002 12:57									#378
	Support Apolyton

Chris:

"Britain's blockade also extended to neutral shipping (in violation of international law) on the grounds that they might be helping the Central powers."

IIRC they justified it at least partly by Germany's violation of Belgium's neutrality. And the US was a lot less outraged because there was less trade with Germany (and less german foreign assets to pay for it, compared with the UK and France) anyway...

	10-07-2002 00:11									#379
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ned Chris, I don't believe England sank any US ships or killed any US citizens. Did they?

They had no intention of p1ssing off the USA, who possed it's own Dreadnaught fleet, larger and more modern then the German fleet, and growing at the time.
If a US flagged ship wanted to go to Germany, they would have reluctantly looked the other way, having already learned that the US would fight if it's shipping was harrased.

quote: One can talk legalities all one wants, but the bottom line is that the Germans killed US citizens - a lot of them - in 1915. This put us on edge. Two years later, after promising not to harras US ships, it declared unlimited submarine warfare which allegedly gave them the "legal" right to kill US citizens.

The bottom line is US nationals have no right to use themselves as human shields aboard British vessals in times of war.

quote: We were outraged, and justifiably so.

Not at all, certain newspapers played up this incident, earlier in the year a German transport sub had left the US carrying valuble cargo and was the toast of the US.
The Brits knew of it's coming and going, and took a stern warning from the US about interferring with it.

quote: IIRC they justified it at least partly by Germany's violation of Belgium's neutrality. And the US was a lot less outraged because there was less trade with Germany (and less german foreign assets to pay for it, compared with the UK and France) anyway...

Your leaving out a VITAL factor, the USA's highest immigrant total was....GERMAN.
A war against Imperial Germany was FAR from popular, so incidents like the Lusitania were played up to incite the US populence against Germany.

As for Britain's blockade, they can't use Belgium as an excuse for stopping Dutch shipping, yet they did just that.
Totally illeagal by international treaty.

Unlike the second world war, where Germany was completely in the wrong and evil, Imperial Germany was no better or worse then the other great powers, so "right and wrong" are not so clear.
People should bare that in mind when discussing this war, it's circumstances are totally different from the vile Nazis.

	10-07-2002 01:38									#380
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Chris, I suspect the use of US citizens as shield was a British idea, not American.

	10-07-2002 06:06									#381
	Inflate your Upload Space

If your fool enough to board an unarmed merchant ship belonging to a combatant sailing into a war zone, you deserve what you get.

To carry on as if the Germans committed some crime is nonsense, if the British had respected the treaty they had signed, the U-Boats would have allowed the ship to be evacuated and NOBODY would have died.

	10-07-2002 07:00									#382
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

But that would have required to the Brits to keep a treaty .

	10-07-2002 12:49									#383
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

"Your leaving out a VITAL factor, the USA's highest immigrant total was....GERMAN.
A war against Imperial Germany was FAR from popular, so incidents like the Lusitania were played up to incite the US populence against Germany."

Sure, but that's a slightly different angle. Although the german share of US population was maybe 15 % or so at a maximum.

Btw, there was a fascinating (british?) TV documentary about Hollywood and WWI, from anti-german propaganda (with Willy II the born slapstick comedian) to "Nothing new at the western front". Seen that by any chance ?

"As for Britain's blockade, they can't use Belgium as an excuse for stopping Dutch shipping, yet they did just that.
Totally illeagal by international treaty."

It was. I only said "they justified it...."