world

U.S. denounces legitimacy of International Criminal Court

32 Comments
By MATTHEW LEE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

32 Comments
Login to comment

It's all going according to Putin's plan.

14 ( +21 / -7 )

Last thing America or Israel need or want is to be held accountable for their citizens actions by a third independent party.

21 ( +22 / -1 )

Rogue state

12 ( +17 / -5 )

Conservatives being repugnant. Nothing new here.

12 ( +16 / -4 )

This is as pathetic as Japanese right-wing nutjobs denouncing the jurisdiction of the International War Crimes Tribunal of the Far East.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

Conservatives being repugnant. Nothing new here.

Well seeing as it's not making the rounds on the 'liberal' media, I'd guess this is america being repugnant.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

These are the true colors shining through. The mask's fallen off. FINALLY!!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

David Scheffer, who established the ICC on behalf of the US and served as the country’s ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues, said: “The Bolton speech today isolates the United States from international criminal justice and severely undermines our leadership in bringing perpetrators of atrocity crimes to justice elsewhere in the world.

“The double standard set forth in his speech will likely play well with authoritarian regimes, which will resist accountability for atrocity crimes and ignore international efforts to advance the rule of law. This was a speech soaked in fear and Bolton sounded the message, once again, that the United States is intimidated by international law and multilateral organizations. I saw not strength but weakness conveyed today by the Trump Administration.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/10/john-bolton-castigate-icc-washington-speech

Bolton actually works for the merchants of hate:

https://theintercept.com/2018/03/23/gatestone-institute-john-bolton-chairs-an-actual-fake-news-publisher-infamous-for-spreading-anti-muslim-hate/

Rogue state, indeed.

15 ( +18 / -3 )

The court has been hobbled by the refusal of the U.S., Russia, China and other major nations to join.

so it’s news that we are not cooperating with a group we have never been a member of?

Or did Obama sign us up for this too? The article doesn’t say he did just that he cooperated more then others may have.

-16 ( +3 / -19 )

The US thinking it can do what it wants without consequences once again.

And then they don't understand why half the world hates them.

Rogue state, for sure.

17 ( +20 / -3 )

Im speaking to the liberals and conservatives. How long did you expect the charade to continue? How long did you expect the world to turn a blind eye to the attrocities committed by america and it's 'allies'? This particular turn of events is welcome. Trump, love him or hate him has brought to the front the real personality of the country. The mask's fallen off for all to see the hypocrisy that's riddled it since it's beginning.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Alfie, Bintaro, Cricky, Silvafan-

Excellent posts!! Alfie, I don't know how you manage to find such wonderful links but thank you. Your links have taught me alot

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Only intellectually deficient people that think and write like 7 year olds love Bolton.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

3 ( +6 / -3 )

He said the U.S. would use "any means necessary" to protect Americans and citizens of allied countries, like Israel, "from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court. Nonsense - US does nothing to protect Americans from the illegitimate courts of Japan.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If there is proof of atrocities, show them to the world. That will force US action. The people will demand it if the proof is strong enough.

I'd be fine if those giving the orders, including Presidents, were indicted too. "Enhanced interrogation" should never have been allowed and the people in the US govt who ok'd it should see some jail time.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

The U.S needs to be held to account just the same as any other country who has a habit of invading and destroying.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Folks the US has been against the ICC since it started, this dimwit bolton is only continuing a mistake, bottom line is the big powerful countries, US China Russia should ALL fall under ICC.

Sad FACT is they just DONT want have to do right, they reserve the "right" to be NASTY & sometimes they are!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Is this Bolton? Trump? US mind frame?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The next time the cops haul you in, insult them and tell them that they have no authority over you. See how it works out. Most of the citizens of the US and the rest of the countries of world other than Russia denounce the legitimacy of the elections that brought Trump to office.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

When it comes to war crimes prosecutions under international law, it's always been one law for the big countries and another for the small. Fine for international courts and tribunals to go ahead and prosecute cases in Rwanda or Serbia - countries that don't matter in the global scheme of things - but quite another to try prosecuting anyone in the UK (like Tony Blair) or the US. And since the US isn't even a signatory to the ICC, forget it.

The most interesting thing here is the extent of the retaliations Bolton is threatening, and his utter dismissiveness of the notion that any other country should have jurisdiction over the US. If that's the case, then why should there be any supranational body with jurisdiction over anyone?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Vietnam was Amerika’s greatest war crime. There was no Nuremberg-style trial for the political and military leadership that attacked and left behind 5 million dead and wounded. As a result of this enormity and the impunity that followed, American leaders have arrogantly and shamelessly continued to commit crimes against humanity ever since. The world must find a deterrent to this never-ending aggression.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Well, the US says they ll quit WTO when faced with trials for breaking rules of the organization.There was something about the UN,too. Now they do not recognize Criminal Court..

Since many international organizations were established using lots of the US funding after the WW2, maybe its the time for the world to rebuild those organizations to be really independent and representative of the nations? So no one could use the strategy'Vote as I told you or I ll cut your funding'.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I'd be fine if those giving the orders, including Presidents, were indicted too.

That happens already. Both Presidents Slobodan Milosevic (Serbia) and Franjo Tudjman (Croatia) were indicted over the Balkan Wars - Milosevic died during his trial, Tudjman died before his trial could even start. Charles Taylor of Sierra Leone was indicted and got 50 years jail, Paul Kagame of Rwanda is under investigation. I'm sure there are others. These were either the leaders of their countries or important players in their civil wars, rather than those who went around killing people personally.

Maybe that's the biggest problem for the leaders of countries such as the US or the UK - the fear that they could be prosecuted for leading governments whose actions lead to massive numbers of civilian deaths such as happened in Vietnam or Iraq.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The USA knows how to make rules for others to obey but seems it is always exempted from any such tribunals.

That's the definition of a superpower.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The USA knows how to make rules for others to obey but deems it is always exempted from any such tribunals.

That's the definition of a superpower.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Is this Bolton? Trump? US mind frame?

Yes.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The USA knows how to make rules for others to obey but deems it is always exempted from any such tribunals.

That's the definition of a superpower.

That's right. And if the US had less power, they would be called a rogue nation.

Funnily enough, I agree that the US should not submit to any politicized international tribunal, nor should any other country. Yet, at the same time, the US needs to stop imposing its version of laws on other sovereign states.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

disgusting. karma's coming though, watch the news tomorrow.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

agree @ u_s__reamer don't forget Laos and Cambodia. Read William Blum Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. ( indicates successful ouster of a government) *https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list

1 ( +1 / -0 )

2 ( +2 / -0 )

There is nothing new here, Bush's 2002 American Service Members Protection Act authorized 'the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court'

https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-becomes-law

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites