Great thing is they can reverse it if they did say yes. Let him do what he wants and then hang him for it. If it’s truly heinous, who’s going to stop the world body?
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
271 points (99.3% liked)
politics
26683 readers
1795 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
America doesn't recognise or uphold it to begin with.
Can't have it both ways, ginger turnip.
Can the rest of us push the ICC to prosecute him extra? … not that it’ll matter much but anything that pisses him off more I’m totally for.
As they conduct more terrorist actions on fishing boats, no less.
Also....2029? I'm not 100% sure cheeto mcpedo is going to make it to 2026. He doesn't look that hot...
Hegseth probably will.
Now why do you think that would that be a thing that he's worried about?
No one demands to be exempt from prosecution for war crimes unless they intend to commit or have already committed war crimes.
The US is exempt from prosecution under the ICC. This has been the case from the start.
Of course he did. If he ordered the attacks on those boats as an act of war, it was a war crime. If he didn't do it as an act of war, it was an act of terrorism, which means either way.... Everyone who followed the orders all the way down the chain, including him, should see life in prison if the world was just.
The first attack on those boats was criminal.
Those last 5 words are the real catch though, aren't they?
100% the reason why a strong and independent ICC is needed.
And also 100% why we won't ever have that
And extradition powers.
I, in an innocent fashion, do this type of thing with all the police, politicians, and judges in my area. Obviously, I never do anything illegal. I'm the picture of law abiding integrity and blamelessness, obviously.
I just want to make sure I'm protected from...idk, stuff? Or aliens?
Anyways, it's definitely totally an innocent thing to strongarm, bribe, and blackmail all these powerful people, police and judges...
Right, I'm off to do some...things. All of which will be legal and I will definitely not be murdering or raping. Oh no, nope. No way.
Where's my balaclava??
Where's my balaclava??
You're eating dessert? At a time like this?
I'm not sure which is more delusional, thinking that this would actually work or thinking that anyone affiliated with the United States (or the West in general) is ever going to be prosecuted by the ICC.
Right. If people like Ronnie Raygun and Cheney and W weren't, it ain't gonna happen.
I’m not sure which is more delusional
These men have succeeded for centuries (possibly millennia) by preemptively creating the reality they want people to perceive through action, and then just pretending the reality they created is the truth. By acting their preemptive reality, (essentially being the change they wish to see in a really fucked up kind of way, and creating the fucked up world they want to live in), they have created their own success and the history leading up to this point, leaving us to study the pieces of fiction they used to destroy. I think this may be one of the rare cases where we could stand to take a page from their book (except the reality we create will remain fact based).
It really doesn't matter that these men want us to believe they have special snowflake status that places them above the law, in addition to not caring that we know they're also terrorists and war criminals.
They committed cold blooded murder of innocent civilians. The families of these civilians are already suing on behalf of their deceased loved ones. There are witnesses who will testify that the secretary of war demanded a second strike be sent to kill every innocent civilian still clinging to pieces of their destroyed boat in order to leave no survivors. There are survivors from follow up attacks who weren't even arrested, because they had never committed any crime in the first place.
These men are a threat to civilization, and we cannot allow them to destroy what we have worked so hard to build. The citizens of the United States and the citizens of the world demand justice, for our individual self preservation and the preservation of all civil society. We demand these men are held accountable for their crimes against humanity.
"That is unacceptable, and we will not allow it to happen.”
Fuck you ❄️
I demand we make it happen
“Lawmakers should undo them legislatively and repeal the ‘Hague Invasion Act’ — or at least amend it to no longer shield the President and Defense Secretary,” Williams went on, referring to a 2003 law permitting the U.S. to use military force to extract any official from the U.S. or an allied country who is detained by the ICC in the Hague.
... Even in 2003, who the fuck thought yeah this is probably fine and nothing weird or evil.
Post 9/11 knee jerk responses that began to erode and destroy a lot of what made the US. The Taliban already won then and there.
The US always has done heinous shit but it was always under the covers. Not blatantly out in the open.
The US were just as shitty before. They dropped the mask once they could stick a theme tune on war.
Their goal was not to destroy the US per se, it was to just get them out of the region. Destroying might have been nice, but only in a way that destroyed their power.
So an unleashed unhinged US was not something they wanted. Sure we might not have the freedom, but they never cared one way or another about that.
You can say it like it is, Bin Laden won...
and now Russia took control of the US
The US always has done heinous shit but it was always under the covers. Not blatantly out in the open.
Uh... Vietnam?
Contra? (As an example of shit done under the table)
Viet Nam was just the first conflict to be shown in all it's horror, and the public didn't like it. Most of the coverage of the world wars and Korea were almost entirely propaganda.
The Hague Invasion Act is so fucking stupid.
The ICC's has no legitimacy if they're unwilling to investigate and prosecute war crimes no matter where they happen.
They can't. You need to be able to back your threats up, what do when the US invades the Hauge ? Throw pencils at them ?
https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-becomes-law
U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.
In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the United States obtains immunity from prosecution. At the same time, these provisions can be waived by the president on "national interest" grounds.
And why, pray tell, will he be needing immunity if he won't be doing anything wrong?
Why is this fake Peace prize winner talkin bout war crimey stuff?
Trump is the corruption in the flesh
Or what? The Trump administration has already set the precedent that things signed into law mean nothing. If Trump wants to sanction the ICC then that effectively means the rest of the world is no longer going to treat the US as a friendly, or even neutral, country.
You can certainly tell the ICC you are not war criminals, but if you do that through strong arming instead of through presentation of evidence then you are one step short of straight up admitting you are a war criminal or intend to perform acts that would make you one in the near future.
You are a shit stain, Donald Trump, and no amount of crying like a whiny little bitch is going to clean your sheets. I hope you enjoy the smell in your own bed, which I guarantee you will be stuck in within 365 days.
Why? .... the US is basically exempt from anything and everything at this point
Oh so now the ICC is on the table, and a legitimate enough threat to be considered worthy of notice.
If I recall we have legislation that was designed around preventing any American soldier from being prosecuted by something like the ICC, I don't know how far up the chain that could be applied however.
Rather interesting given that I'm not familiar with any ongoing effort to even look into charges, at the least it does demonstrate a certain understanding of the weight of orders given. At the very least, it gives more strength to domestic opposition in whatever discovery is done by the Senate or House in the future.