A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Even if they WERE gang members, civilized nations do not shoot civilians.
They could have boarded the ship and detained them, but they chose violence.
They even admitted they could've interdicted the boat, but chose to kill them instead.
It was 100% absolutely, unquestionably a war crime.
And even if Trump is immune, the rest of those involved are NOT. Some of them are lawyering up, because war crimes can carry a death penalty.
Is it still a war crime without a war? I'm not trying to split hairs or justify the crime, just wondering about definitions. A quick search didn't really clarify it. Violation of international law, absolutely. And who would prosecute? I don't think the US has allowed itself to be subjugated to any international court.
You're correct, the ICC's jurisdiction has never been recognized by the US, or a bunch of other countries for that matter. They could still prosecute individuals and convict them, but the US wouldn't hand them over, and it's not likely that anyone would attempt to come get them.
There is a pretty large number of ICC fugatives from all over the world, notably Russian and Israeli officials. Afaik, France and the UK are the only two UN members with veto power that recognize the ICC's official jurisdiction.
It technically may not even be a breach of international law, since the US is one of the few countries that did not ratify UNCLOS, the law that would apply in international waters. The US was evil for a long time and refused to sign anything that would hold them even symbolically accountable. This did not start with Trump. He just went mask off.
Would this mean that the reverse is also true? Any 'war crimes' done on Americans aren't war crimes because they themselves don't recognise it?
We just need a bigger stick?
I would love to know as well, so I am slowly reading the UNCLOS treaty as I have time. We have no obligation towards US to not sink their ships, but we may have given promises to other parties of UNCLOS not to attack any ships, even those that did not sign.
It's like if your promise your wife you will be nice to your mother in law. You did not promise anything to your mother in law and she promised nothing to you, but you are still obligated to be nice to her unless your wife agrees to cancel the promise.
So I don't know if UNCLOS only deals with not sinking member ships or all ships.
Also, touching US ships is historically very dumb thing to do.
Only one soldier ever faced consequences for the My Lai massacre and he only got three and a half years of house arrest, so it’s not like we care that much about war crimes anyway.
The only person in Washington talking sense about this is... Wait, let me double check. Uh, yea it's Rand Paul.
You know things are bad when the voice of reason is Rand Paul
That Rand Paul is the voice of reason bodes very very badly.
I know they're probably full of shit like any corrupt politicians, but it's nice to have them fight back. Even if they were convicted gang members, the US murdered all of them. I hope they spend the next few years fucking with this administration as much as possible. We need to get back to that place where locals fling shoes at our politicians, because we suck and need to back the fuck off.
The thing with blowing them up instead of taking them into custody, is that there is no evidence to prove the allegations against them. They blew it up. If they really wanted to justify their actions, this was not the way.
We know they probably weren't just speedboat enthusiasts but blowing the boat up sets a precedent for extrajudicial killing without first establishing guilt.
Of course, this had nothing to do with justice, it was only about sending a very visual message to the other cartels that only US backed cartels are allowed.
Given that Venezuela has chronic shortages of almost everything, these days...it's entirely possible they were smugglers. But they could have been smuggling anything from mail-order packages, to cash, or even medicine. We'll never know now.
This will just motivate Venezuela to hurry around their military modernization effort possibly with a lot more public support than before
I don't trust Trump about this, but I trust Venezuela about as much as I trust Trump.
Eh, Trump is absolute bottom of my list. Even if it's by a barely measurable amount, I trust everyone more than Trump. No exceptions.
Just because you haven't heard as much from Nicolas Maduro. Maduro's (lack of) connection to reality is similar to Trump's. In a slightly different world they would be best buddies.
No
I meant what I said, to and frankly can do without the insulting tone.
All else being equal, the guy who destroys all the evidence is less trustworthy.
have you heard why there were 11 drug dealers together on a small boat and where they were supposed to be going?
when we asked in the towns, none were from Tren de Aragua, none were drug traffickers
Both sides provided "trust me, bro" as their proof.
Ok but the usa is the one who attacked so they are the one who has to provide evident. Venezuela doesn't have to prove anything
Even if they were gang members smuggling drugs, that's still not how the law is dealt in the civilized world. They're still civilians and it's still murder.
Agree i only debated that part of your previous comment Both sides provided "trust me, bro" as their proof.
There is only one side who should provide proofs with is the USA
You've been trained well.
I mean obviously Trump and his goons are full of shit but so is Maduro. Is the any actual information about who these murder victims were and what they were doing? Just curious…
Doesn't matter. It's a war crime either way.
Like I said I’m just curious. Although there is no war so I think mass murder is maybe a more appropriate term?
It is a war crime as defined by the International Court. You don't have to be in a formal war to commit a war crime.
Doesn't matter if it's a war crime if there's no way to prosecute anyone.
Yeah, but it makes the poster feel good about himself.
It does matter, actually.
First off, war crimes don't matter. Saying something is a "war crime" is akin to saying "and they got away with it." Just look at Ukraine and Israel.
Second, if these people were gangbangers, they deserved what they got.
Gangbangers are the dredge of human society and anyone who defends them is a child who should not be taken seriously.
Anyone who says "gangbanger" unironically is a child who should not be taken seriously. Anyone who defends unlawful murder of civilians is a child who shouldn't be taken seriously. Anyone who says that war crimes "don't matter" is a child who shouldn't be taken seriously.
Regardless of whether they deserved it, they are afforded all rights that we also are. In this case, lawful arrests and representation.
So let's support the murder of all usa politicians reponsible for the genocide in gaza. This is how dumb your logic is
....and the right says "well it was the liberals' fault so can you blame us??"
Big fucking surprise.