h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Okay, I will go for it, thanks.

GET THE AMERICAN DICTATOR AND HIS SUPPORTERS OUT OF THE GREAT BASIN!!!

TAIPO, I MEAN YANKEE, GO HOME!!!

I'm confident that we'll be willing to hold the rest of the country in trust for the American people until they can be taught how to govern themselves.

I can just hear the government now...(their words, not mine)"but aren't Indian reservations sovereign nations?"

"Therefore, Blair is liable for prosecution under the Treaty for carrying out illegal military action. A war Crime."

Yes, and at this point, so are the Israelis. But you don't see them in front of the tribunal in the Hague, either.

The Israeli's are in breach of Resolution whichever it is that calls for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian settlemets, yes, but they've crucially never declared war and there is still some dispute about whether it is Israeli or Palestinian soil...

I don't know how much of a defence they could mount if someone did go through the ICC. The point is that CND are already gearing up to put Blair in there...

Yeah, Montana, they say that already, and then repudiate it in their next breath.

No, we've waited long enough, 160 years or so which is way longer than 12 years and we're fed up with the American government's delaying tactics, misrepresentations and failure to abide by international treaty. Plus they been storing and actually testing weapons of mass destruction in the disputed territory and unlike them we can get plenty of proof of that by their own documentation.

Help us get rid of these international terrorists NOW!!!

What is really sad about this war is that neither side gives a flying f**k about the Iraqi people. Saddam has oppressed, tortured and murdered them, the West helped Saddam oppress and murder them, and then carpet bombed, irradiated (depleted uranium) and starved (sanctions) them.

The White House: "It's about disarmament. No, it's about regime change. No, it's ..."

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/03/17/iraq_res030317

So now, even if the Iraqis crush all their missiles, bend over backwards for the inspectors, and get Saddam to leave the country, Bush and the boys are still going to invade. So, what is it about?

I'm sorry, but Bush et. al. are getting to look more and more delusionally psychotic by the minute. Clearly, there has never been anything that could have prevented the invasion.

Well, now that we are just a few hours away from the start of the war (you can expect the first bombs to hit Baghdad approximately 30 seconds after Bush's bullying ultimatum to the UN expires), I'd just like to thank Phony Tony Blair for making me into a war criminal. Hell, I admit it. My taxes helped pay for those tanks. At the time I stupidly imagined they might be needed to defend Britain, rather than invade foreign countries without the support of the British people. And more importantly the sanction of the UN. Which is illegal under international law, hence you, me and every other Brit will be a war criminal as of tomorrow. Thanks again, Tony.

The USA cunningly refuses to recognise the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. So, they could refuse to answer any indictment brought by it. We in the UK however, DO recognise the court. Any other country AFAIK could bring a charge to the international criminal court against us.

The US Government have cleverly avoided the possibility of being successfully charged with war crimes. They are, however, hypocritical warmongering scum. George W. Bush is criminally insane and will go down in history as an even worse President than Richard Nixon.

No offence Zagreb, but we're miles apart on this one

It's ironic NATO "helped" the Kosovans by carpeting bombing Serbia with depleted uranium and cluster bombs, considering it doesn't help the Chechen separatists who are being massacred by the Russians, and the fact that the US helps pay for Turkey's ethnic cleansing of the Kurds, Israel's oppression of the Palestinians and Colombia's "counter-terrorist" death squads and fascist paramilitaries.

In fact Milosevic is arguing at his genocide trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in the Hague that his attrocities were equivalent to America and it's allies' "war on terrorism"--and in many ways it is as the examples above show.

In fraud, I mean god, we trust!!

"And more importantly the sanction of the UN. Which is illegal under international law, hence you, me and every other Brit will be a war criminal as of tomorrow. Thanks again, Tony."

What a load of F***g B******s

"And more importantly the sanction of the UN. Which is illegal under international law, hence you, me and every other Brit will be a war criminal as of tomorrow. Thanks again, Tony."

What a load of F***g B******s

Uber alles, eh Stuart?

I dunno, I kinda thought it was brief, well argued and pithy...

Though I have to say that *we* the population of the UK don't become war criminals, but Tony could conceivably find himself in front of the Hague.

It's unlikely, butit *is* possible...

Blair already is a war criminal considering his conduct in Serbia (1999) and Afghanistan (2001 to present).

Among his crimes, which could get him a mandatory life sentence in the English courts, are:

the crime against humanity of murder
the war crime of willful killing of civilians
the war crime of attacking undefended buildings
the war crime of wanton destruction
the war crime of using poisonous weapons (depleted uranium)
the war crime of using weapons that cause unnescessarily suffering (DU and cluster bombs), etc.

(If fact cluster bombs are probably illegal under the UK Landmines Act considering they are pretty much the same as landmines, only dropped from the air).

In fact, in Afghanistan we were stupid enough to drop food parcels that look like cluster bombs!

It won't make UK civillians guilty of war crimes and the crime against peace of levying an agressive war. It'll be the civilian leaders, the military commanders all the way down to the soldiers (according to the Nuremburg judgement that overturned the "just following orders" defence). But civillians are not responsibility merely because they are legally obliged to pay taxes.

It won't make UK civillians guilty of war crimes and the crime against peace of levying an agressive war. It'll be the civilian leaders, the military commanders all the way down to the soldiers (according to the Nuremburg judgement that overturned the "just following orders" defence). But civillians are not responsibility merely because they are legally obliged to pay taxes.

Just thought I'd place this here...

"The new International Criminal Court, for example, does not have jurisdiction over the legal issue of going to war. It could deal with possible war crimes, but this would centre on how soldiers conducted themselves, not on the legality of the war in the first place."

to be found at...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2847929.stm

This post has been removed.

It says in the Rome Statute that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction over aggression, but only after its been properly defined, and this hasn't happened yet. This is one reason why the ICC cannot prosecute terrorism, sice there is no unanimous definition--the old "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." and "can states be prosecuted for terrorism" argument. (Although it could prosecute large-scale attacks against civillians as the crime against humanity of murder)

The ICC on acts committed by or against ICC members (e.g. the UK, Canada), and acts committed by their nationals anywhere.

This means if the US (not a member) attacks country X, which is a member of the ICC, the ICC can theoretically (unless the US bribes a few more countries) prosecute US nationals involved in the war, and they can be arrested and extradited by an ICC member or any country willing to do so.

And if the UK attacks anyone, or if UK nationals commit genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes anywhere--including in countries like the US that are not a member--then UK nationals can be prosecuted.

(Although the ICC can only prosecute people aged 18+, unlike the UK where its 10+ and Germany and other European countries where its 14+).

Did you write that yourself?