this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
-1 points (48.6% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7227 readers
155 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 9 months ago (13 children)

Obviously it's doomed to fail, war criminals have never held to account in a totalitarian dictatorship like the US.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 0 points 9 months ago (12 children)
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (11 children)

If you disagree with my assessment, then perhaps you could provide an example of a US official being held accountable for the atrocities US commits.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But we're discussing your disagreement with my assessment that "charge" is willfully dishonest.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There's no disagreement, it's obvious that your assessment is sophistry meant to distract from the actual point being made. Nobody is falling for it.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

What's obvious is that my assessment is probably correct. The lawsuit will fail because the "actual point being made" is not a legal point but a political one. And certainly not a criminal point.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

ICJ just ruled that there is a probable case for genocide in Gaza, and there is clear evidence that US has been aiding and abetting this genocide since the start. US has vetoed multiple ceasefire resolution at the UN, and has provided Israel with the material aid to carry out the genocide. The only reason nobody in US will be held accountable for these atrocities is because US regime sees itself as being above international law. This is why a civil case is because there is no path to any actual justice.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But "charged"? Come on. That's clearly trying to obfuscate that it's a private lawsuit.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The article is pretty clear about the nature of the lawsuit. Using the word charged here is entirely reasonable. It's amazing that you spent so much energy debating an entirely irrelevant point while ignoring the actual context of Joe Biden aiding and abetting a genocide, or the fact that there is no path towards holding him accountable. That seems like the part that's actually worth discussing.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It’s amazing that you spent so much energy debating an entirely irrelevant point

Can you believe I even read the lawsuit?! Crazy, I know!

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The only thing that's crazy here is that you're evidently unable to say anything of substance on Tue subject.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The irony is almost palpable.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

That word you're using, I do not think it means what you think it means. Although, I suppose there is a certain irony in you making vacuous comments while evidently fancying yourself an intellectual.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago

The irony is that you're the one failing to bring anything of substance to the discussion. For example, comments consisting solely of insults.

I'll let you get in the last word.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)