Yeah, but the states said it's okay so ๐คทโโ๏ธ
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
77 points (95.3% liked)
World News
37486 readers
383 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 11 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
We know for sure that war crimes are being committed by both sides of this. We know that's happening in Ukraine too. We know the USA, UK, Canada, etc. and their allies committed serious war crimes in previous engagements.
Nobody follows the rules. Having rules in war is pretty stupid. The only rules are the ones your citizens will vote you out (or otherwise depose you) for crossing and that is nowhere close to what's happening right now. We (humanity) are willing to accept a lot of horrific shit to "win" when we think we're right.
Having rules in war is pretty stupid.
Hard disagree. The Geneva Conventions and Rules of War were a good idea and we in democratic countries should strive to make our governments uphold them as much as we can.
As an international community we should hold leaders accountable for their troops' actions.
After the chemical weapons in WWI everyone said no more. After the Holocaust in WWII everyone said no more. Sure there have been more since then but it is nothing on the carnage and horror of what would have unfolded without any rules.
And yet "everyone" didn't sign on the enforcement mechanism. In fact, of the countries with the top 10 armies (by active personnel, not effectiveness) only 1 has signed onto participate in the International Criminal Court (South Korea)
China, India, USA, Russia, Iran... They all said no
The rules aren't stopping anyone, that's why they keep getting violated. The worst rules haven't been violated yet because nobody has been desperate enough, but it will absolutely happen.
@BlameThePeacock yes it's deplorable that the superpowers have placed themselves above international law. I still disagree with your conclusion that we should have no law.
Worth noting the ICC is meant as a court of last resort for people who can't prosecute war crimes in their own countries due to infrastructure or jurisdiction. As such it still provides enormous value, even if there are some war criminals we cannot touch.
So Russia should start using nuclear weapons and chemical and biological attacks, and blowing up nuclear power plants in Ukraine, then?
Putin is dead if he tries that. The rest of the world will depose him forcefully.
It's not like he's not doing it because of the Geneva convention right now. He's clearly not following many of those rules already because he knows nobody will stop him.
That's what I'm saying, the only thing that matters in war is the limits imposed by others, Not self limits.
They're right though. If you establish that war crimes are OK to do, it removes all your legitimacy and opens up the enemy to do them too. It's a lot harder to rally the world against your opponent for doing something you've been shamelessly doing the whole time.
You realize the US never signed the agreement to allow the International Criminal Court to prosecute Americans for war crimes right? Neither did Israel, Russia, China, or India.
The Geneva convention is essentially a guidebook at this point, it has no enforcement mechanism against anybody that matters in the current military engagements happening in the world.