Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:02 AM
 
675 posts, read 542,633 times
Reputation: 150

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamford View Post
The UN actually carries out a good deal of peacekeeping in places such as the Balkans and Africa, it just not well known. It should also be known that the US Coalition forces have a UN Mandate to be in Afghanistan.

International policing is through consent and shared intelligence, and does not involve some international force going in to countries and arresting people. This is simply not going to happen.
I am not talking about some peacekeeping group. I am talking about a group that brings justice for crimes against humanity.

More of a mix between and Army and a Police Force.

Now will such a group or organization ever be formed? Highly unlikely.

This day in age you should not have large scale atrocities committed by governments and key influential people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:09 AM
 
Location: Somewhere Out West
2,287 posts, read 2,582,197 times
Reputation: 1956
So you are wanting an international police force? Whose laws would they enforce?

If someone does something in country A that country B deems illegal, this force would go forward and arrest that person in country A based on the laws of country B? Where would they be tried?

It seems to be that concept invalidates sovereign rights of a nation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:20 AM
 
675 posts, read 542,633 times
Reputation: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy View Post
So you are wanting an international police force? Whose laws would they enforce?

If someone does something in country A that country B deems illegal, this force would go forward and arrest that person in country A based on the laws of country B? Where would they be tried?

It seems to be that concept invalidates sovereign rights of a nation.
Are you familiar with basic inherent human rights?

They would be tried in said groups international court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:20 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
2,737 posts, read 3,156,970 times
Reputation: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy View Post
So you are wanting an international police force? Whose laws would they enforce?

If someone does something in country A that country B deems illegal, this force would go forward and arrest that person in country A based on the laws of country B? Where would they be tried?

It seems to be that concept invalidates sovereign rights of a nation.


Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:25 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
2,737 posts, read 3,156,970 times
Reputation: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Are you familiar with basic human rights?

They would be tried in said groups international court.
Countries such as the US don't even adhere to most international law and don't partake in the International Courts in the Hague, so there is little chance of ever establishing a truly international court.

If a Court were truly International and had some kind of enforcement body, then I would be more than happy for Tony Blair and George W. Bush to stand trial over the invasion of a soverign country without a UN Mandate and the subsequent loss of innocent civilian life in relation to Iraq, I suppose we could have Putin in the dock as well, or does this just apply to third world countries.

Now do you see why the US won't participate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:29 AM
 
675 posts, read 542,633 times
Reputation: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamford View Post
Countries such as the US don't even adhere to most international law and don't partake in the International Courts in the Hague, so there is little chance of ever establishing a truly international court.

If a Court were truly International and had some kind of enforcement body, then I would be more than happy for Tony Blair and George W. Bush to stand trial over the invasion of a soverign country without a UN Mandate and the subsequent loss of innocent civilian life in relation to Iraq, I suppose we could have Putin in the dock as well, or does this just apply to third world countries.

Now do you see why the US won't participate.
Oh please.

Without a UN mandate? The UN is a complete joke. Anyone would be a fool to take them seriously.

Saddam committed countless crimes against humanity, so any invasion to remove him from power was justified.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:36 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
2,737 posts, read 3,156,970 times
Reputation: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Oh please.

Without a UN mandate? The UN is a complete joke. Anyone would be a fool to take them seriously.

Saddam committed countless crimes against humanity, so any invasion to remove him from power was justified.
So it was justified to go in to Iraq because they commited crimes against humanity.

China's human rights record is also a bit dodgy are you going to invade their next, what about North Korea and where was the US when the genocide was occurring in Rwanda, and what about the Saudi's who are at the very heart of the terrorist activity that led to 9/11 and who are a terrible regime.

Also using crimes against humanity as a reason to go in to a country and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, whilst destabalising it in the process leading to the rise of sectarianism and ISIS is hardly what I would call a successful intervention.

Dropping bombs on innocent people to save them from tyranny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:46 AM
 
675 posts, read 542,633 times
Reputation: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamford View Post
So it was justified to go in to Iraq because they commited crimes against humanity.

China's human rights record is also a bit dodgy are you going to invade their next, what about North Korea and where was the US when the genocide was occurring in Rwanda, and what about the Saudi's who are at the very heart of the terrorist activity that led to 9/11 and who are a terrible regime.

Also using crimes against humanity as a reason to go in to a country and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, whilst destabalising it in the process leading to the rise of sectarianism and ISIS is hardly what I would call a successful intervention.

Dropping bombs on innocent people to save them from tyranny.
Ovcourse it was justified. Any crimes against humanity carried out by governments should be dealt with. The world should know this kind of stuff will not be tolerated in todays age.

Quote:
China's human rights record is also a bit dodgy are you going to invade their next, what about North Korea and where was the US when the genocide was occurring in Rwanda, and what about the Saudi's who are at the very heart of the terrorist activity that led to 9/11 and who are a terrible regime.
This is EXACTLY the reason why we need what I am proposing. Hard for individual countries to police the world, and many times will only do so out of self interest due to the amount of money and resources it would take. Which is bs. Thats the whole reason you need a large coalition of countries to pool resources to handle these issues without bias of individual interests.

No one said anything about dropping bombs on innocent people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:47 AM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
8,227 posts, read 11,123,183 times
Reputation: 8198
Quote:
Originally Posted by medellinheel View Post
Amazes me that there is no legitimate international committee to ensure basic human rights. I guess you might say the UN falls under this category, but lets be real. The UN is a complete joke.
And who's supposed to pay for this this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 05:48 AM
 
675 posts, read 542,633 times
Reputation: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Bricks View Post
And who's supposed to pay for this this?
The members of said international group.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:52 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top