this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
46 points (97.9% liked)

chapotraphouse

13461 readers
823 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anarchoilluminati@hexbear.net 23 points 3 days ago (4 children)

My 'I'm not planning on invading the Netherlands' shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by my shirt.

Seriously, though, this isn't the first time?

[–] bunnygirl@hexbear.net 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Oh god no

The US notoriously has a law (usually dubbed The Hague Invasion Act) allowing their president to invade the Netherlands if any US imperial soldiers were to be detained by the ICC

Occasionally it'll come up and some US government official or senator or sth will go into the traditional American bloodrage and demand to invade if those sneaky anti-war crimes people at the ICC try anything. Most recently it happened when the chief prosector at the ICC requested arrest warrants for a few Israeli officials

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

at the ICC requested arrest warrants for a few Israeli officials

The US will say "Sorry ICC. Israel is covered under our law. Also - fuck you." Emphasis mine.

American Service-Members' Protection Act

The American Service-Members' Protection Act (enacted August 2, 2002), known informally as The Hague Invasion Act, is a United States federal law described as "a bill to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party".

The Act gives the president power to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court".

[–] bunnygirl@hexbear.net 12 points 3 days ago

ya, I don't remember the specific language they used in response to the warrant request but it was literally sth like 'an attack on Israeli sovereignty is an attack on US sovereignty'

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)