RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes

RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/6/2010 2:59:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave If I was Israel I would just give the guy diplomatic status and tell the Palestinian terrorists and their British supporters to go do each other. You're a supporter of state-sanctioned terrorism? Lovely. Why am I not surprised?

FullCircle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/6/2010 3:03:02 PM)
His argument about the diplomatic status kind of falls apart by virtue of the fact that if Israel could grant it then it would and thus this discussion about universal jurisdiction wouldn't be occurring. I think a state that grants such immunity generally has to believe the diplomat will be prosecuted for their crimes in their own country. Not likely.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/6/2010 3:05:34 PM)
quote: Not likely. +1

Aneirin -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/6/2010 5:41:37 PM)
Israel is a terrorist state, but not reffered to as such because they are on our side or at least the side of those who tell us what is going on and what to believe.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/6/2010 9:21:52 PM)
Although we could argue over the legality of Israel's actions (I can cite legal precedence, point out successful Israel self monitoring, as well as false accusation which are propaganda, and I'm sure you could do the equivalent...let's not pretend either side is a saint), maybe we should instead discuss the topic at hand? Should a diplomatic entity be subject to arrest in a foreign nation? Due to inconvenience on the part of the official being arrested which could take months or years, no nation would willingly submit an official to this process in another nation unless it wished to cut ties with said official. In the US diplomatic immunity protects against arrest and detainment, I'd assume the same is the case for most EU countries. In my opinion the wheels of negotiations between nations should not be hindered by a court of one of those nations. In general I believe a court both nations recognize would be able to take such action. Attempting to apply your nations legal system onto another nation is arrogant and should not be done as long as there are official friendly channels open with that nation. Even if you disagree with the stance Britain has with another nation, its citizens should not be given the privilege to interfere with international politics in such a way. Were they to apply the same arrest warrant for a north korean official, an Iranian or any other nation I disagree with (even being in the US) I would feel that the British would have made an offense that is equivalent to saying "negotiations are over, we are enemies" and this power should not be invested in a common man.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 2:29:13 AM)
That being the case, MasterNJ20, how do you think we should deal with the members of rogue regimes (such as those in Israel or Zimbabwe) who engage in War Crimes? And what do we do when our own governments collude with these criminals for political convenience? Do we just shrug our shoulders and let them get on with it? Israel was quite happy about the arrangement when it was about hunting down members of the German Nazi party who were accused of war crimes. Suddenly, now their own murderous politicians are clearly in the frame, it doesn't seem such a good idea. Double standard, or what?

truckinslave -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 4:39:01 AM)
This is farcical. Diplomatic immunity was conceived, it exists, to protect the leaders/diplomats of one country from being charged with crimes while in another. You could not be more wrong.

truckinslave -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 4:41:56 AM)
quote: I'm not sure that I would want to let questions about impartiality get in the way of a hanging. If we did that, every war criminal would be quite safe. I am so glad that our courts reject so thoroughly the above lynch-mob mentality. Why bother with your show trial?

truckinslave -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 4:46:42 AM)
quote: You're a supporter of state-sanctioned terrorism? Lovely. Why am I not surprised? What an utterly juvenile comment. To be such I would have to be a supporter of hamas, the plo, mahmoud, the palestinians, etc etc. If Israel had been settled by a cross-section of Americans, rather than by a cross-section of international Jewry, there would today be as many rowdy palestinians as there are violent Apaches. We are not nearly as patient a people as the Israelis.

truckinslave -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 4:48:40 AM)
quote: I think a state that grants such immunity generally has to believe the diplomat will be prosecuted for their crimes in their own country. You need to at least look up the definition. Your ignorance is willful at this point.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 5:15:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: I'm not sure that I would want to let questions about impartiality get in the way of a hanging. If we did that, every war criminal would be quite safe. I am so glad that our courts reject so thoroughly the above lynch-mob mentality. Why bother with your show trial? It was good enough for Saddam. I'm damn sure it's good enough for Livni.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 5:19:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: You're a supporter of state-sanctioned terrorism? Lovely. Why am I not surprised? What an utterly juvenile comment. To be such I would have to be a supporter of hamas, the plo, mahmoud, the palestinians, etc etc. If Israel had been settled by a cross-section of Americans, rather than by a cross-section of international Jewry, there would today be as many rowdy palestinians as there are violent Apaches. We are not nearly as patient a people as the Israelis. Ah, right. So your argument now is that because the Israelis haven't played the genocide card like the US did on the Native Americans, they must therefore be OK? Excuse me if I don't find that especially convincing. The Israeli state is every bit as evil as the other groups you mention. It's about perspective.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 5:24:16 AM)
Again I'd rather you not keep going with name calling of Israel while we have our little chat because its just disrespectful. I can cite legal precedence and argument validating many of what you would consider Israel's grave breaches of international law if you would so like to go to that instead of talking about detainment of foreign officials. Because the government is privy to much more detail than common people in terms of international conflict, they can grow more biased towards one side, yes, but they generally know more details than you or I. As such I feel even if the leader of Zimbabwe was in town, unless he acted in such a way that I would consider an act of war (such as murder), and all damages he did were paid for by himself or by the US government (being I'm in the US, were I in the UK I'd expect the UK government to pay). Unless those 2 things were false, I would feel horrified were the civilians of the US, UK, or any other nation were able to put out arrest warrants for the leader of Zimbabwe should he have an official meeting planned with the host nation.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 5:58:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20 Because the government is privy to much more detail than common people in terms of international conflict, they can grow more biased towards one side, yes, but they generally know more details than you or I. As such I feel even if the leader of Zimbabwe was in town, unless he acted in such a way that I would consider an act of war (such as murder), and all damages he did were paid for by himself or by the US government (being I'm in the US, were I in the UK I'd expect the UK government to pay). Unless those 2 things were false, I would feel horrified were the civilians of the US, UK, or any other nation were able to put out arrest warrants for the leader of Zimbabwe should he have an official meeting planned with the host nation. Question: Does that not imply that were this 1960, and Adolph Eichmann moved in next door to you, you'd be quite happy as long as he didn't play loud music? Or are you simply suggesting that members of foreign governments should be left in peace regardless of what they get up to? If the latter is the case, do you not find it problematic that mass murderers would apparently be immune from prosecution in a way that ex-mass murderers and common people are not? That would worry me, because the suggestion is that war criminals cannot be prevented in any legal way from committing war crimes except by act of war on their nation...

Aneirin -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 6:36:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave This is farcical. Diplomatic immunity was conceived, it exists, to protect the leaders/diplomats of one country from being charged with crimes while in another. You could not be more wrong. Ah so that is the purpose of diplomatic immunity, to shield a perpetrator from justice if they commit crimes in another country, what are we saying here, those with that status can go abroad and commit crimes, when it is the normal citizen of a country is urged not to do such things as it may bring disrepute on their country of origin. This surely is a case of double standards, the diplomats can commit crime abroad and get away with it but the people of a country should not. Tell me why is it foreign diplomats need such immunity from justice unless they are going to a country with the intention of committing crime, it is almost as if crime is state sanctioned in other countries by the diplomat being of a select few recruited for a purpose. The bad thing about this, is the crime the dipomatic immunity shields and the fact that crime caused in other countries usually has a direct effect on the country of diplomat origin, as revenge is enacted. Diplomatic immunity should not exist, as it gives license to commit crime overseas, so called government officials should be on their best behaviour when they are the guest of another country as anything other suggests they are a bunch of criminals and are in fact doing more damage to their country of origin than good. But regards the common man and government the former should keep it's nose out of international affairs, that is just plain ludicrous, as we are governed by laws set down and those that deal in international politics do not, it is as if it definately is a case of them and us and with the them and us we just have to question who the enemy really is, those that act against us or those that irritate/initiate the situation in the first place.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 6:46:31 AM)
Israel tends to ignore the status of foreigners and just execute them wherever they are if they are a nuisance.

Aneirin -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 6:50:02 AM)
Perhaps then Israel is a rogue state

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 6:52:36 AM)
Yes, I think so.

Aneirin -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 6:56:14 AM)
And it seems the west is protecting it, why is the question, is it religious or is there something else going on ?

FullCircle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/7/2010 7:03:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave This is farcical. Diplomatic immunity was conceived, it exists, to protect the leaders/diplomats of one country from being charged with crimes while in another. You could not be more wrong. I don't dispute it exists but it's not as all encompassing as you are saying it is. It can be withdrawn by the foreign and commonwealth office at anytime (unlikely) and it can be waivered by the foreign state itself (also not likely in Israel's case). In addition there are different levels of it with specific definitions as to which staff qualify under each definition. Diplomatic immunity also for certain levels doesn't affect the process of civil cases. War crimes also fall under a special category not quite covered by it: I mean obviously we've never prosecuted anyone in Eastern Europe have we because they all had diplomatic immunity. You also don't seem to understand universal jurisdiction it isn't often that the UK government and its people are seeking such prosecutions. It's done on the behest of other prosecutors in higher courts. I've not personally called for anyone to be prosecuted. Most likely anyone doing so wouldn't get the case they wanted past the initial assessment stage. You know it's a bit like that bollocks extradition treaty that the UK has with the US.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125