Comment by sdeframond
4 hours ago
> So half of the defendants carried out the justice sought by the ICC on the other half.
...without trial. And assuming guilty and sentenced to death.
4 hours ago
> So half of the defendants carried out the justice sought by the ICC on the other half.
...without trial. And assuming guilty and sentenced to death.
Trial by which court?
This is standard rules of war. Soldiers don’t have to convene a court before shooting at enemy combatants.
>This is standard rules of war.
So was most of what was done on October 7th by Hamas...
>Soldiers don’t have to convene a court before shooting at enemy combatants.
Or, a convoy of ambulances running with lights and sirens along a pre-approved route.
Indeed, conflating execution without trial with ‘justice’ is utterly bizarre.
There are no trials in combat.
These answers are assuming that the individuals killed were also those responsible. With Israel's stranglehold on media access to Gaza (perhaps better: open hostility), we will likely never know who was killed and what were the charges against them.
I think this comment shows how far removed is the modern person living in a sheltered, matcha-sipping western environment from actual human historical reality. Do you seriously suggest that during an active war one side would bring the other to trial rather than just destroy them?
Have you heard about Nuremberg trials?
The winning side destroying the losing has historically been the exception, not the rule. So why not?
I agree. Having lived with a civil war and with non-western roots I find the Western attitude to things like this to be hopelessly naive. It is the product of a golden age following the collapse of communism and the subsequent unrealistic "end of history" optimism.
So in the case of Sri Lanka, was the LLRC set up and subsequently criticised as a mechanism to lend legitimacy to the way in which government forces conducted operations against LTTE? If so, would its mere existence not indicate some level of societal buy-in to the idea that actions should take part according to some judicial form of 'justice'?
You're missing the point, "justice sought by the ICC" implies that the ICC just wanted to execute them, which is obviously not true.