Jump to content

Should Canada leave ICJ?


Recommended Posts

Right off the start: this is not a knee-jerk to any particular decisions. Only about the reality, seeing it, understanding it and taking it for what it is, not something we're dreaming or imagining.

We are living in uncertain, quite possibly, dangerous times. The way forward looks murky and obstructed by many obstacles. Then, there's no point and importantly, no benefits in imposing on it rosy Red riding hood stencil of imagined offices and institutions that can, and do nothing: patently and repeatedly, in this reality. And the harm, very real one: an erosion of the very notion of justice.

The Charter that every passing thug can violate at will with unlimited impunity.

Quasi "security council", with violent robber and recidivist, pathological aggressor proposing measures and decisions.

Something called "court", without any means to implement and enforce its decisions.

That is another, separate discussion that needs to be had with a clearly understood outcome: what could abstract justice, without any practical effect in the reality do? Would it do more harm than good, spitting out useless words that mean nothing and no one going to hear?

Imagine, in a town ruled by violent gangs, you would have a "justice" reading their daily decisions. How long would it be for it to turn into some comical parody, a show that no one would take seriously: that is, the opposite of the intent? I see absolutely no point in such a scenario. The notion of abstract justice is deeply flawed and not clear at all if it would serve any good. If so, what would be the reason to bother?

Better, let's see the future for what it can be, and prepare to it best as we can. No need for rosy, impossible spectacles. They could do us more harm than good: and did, many times in history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"The ICJ called today on President Bolsonaro and other public officials to fully respect judicial independence and the independent electoral procedures .."

Wtf? So it can rule on some election procedures, but not on a blatant, outrageous aggression that blatantly violated all laws, principles and charters? What is it? I don't even have a word for it.

At least two members of the ICJ who supported the recent case against Israel, recently officially questioned enforcing mandates issued by the court: Braizl and South Africa. So, do you support the decisions of the presumably, "court" or you do not? Can you figure it out already, unless it's some kind of a joke, a pantomime?

This goes straight to the core of the notion of justice: it cannot be applied selectively (that's right, Mr. Prosecutor). If you ignore, let off the hook a serial killer on some technicality, then charge a thief that in itself sets the value of your justice: nil. If you claim to adhere to principles, then refuse to implement them you set the real price of your commitment: nothing. So stop bringing those cases with a straight concerned face, as if for real: it's worth nothing; you yourself set the price, remember?

Why do we need to play in more of useless: that's de facto, international pantomimes? No: we don't need to. It never worked to impose dreams and plays on the stark reality. And it won't.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, myata said:

Why do we need to play in more of useless: that's de facto, international pantomimes? No: we don't need to. It never worked to impose dreams and plays on the stark reality. And it won't.

Because it's the year 2024 ffs.

We should be at the point where we're electing global parliaments by now.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's increasingly clear that any UN body controlled by the General Assembly is apt to be corrupt due to the GA being made up of mostly dictatorship countries.

Harper was criticized for wanting to defund and leave parts of the UN.  Looks like he was right.  We owe him an apology on that.

John McCain wanted to create a League of Democracies.  I still agree with this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

UN as a talking club and a bunch of cultural-humanitarian fora is OK. That part of its activities shouldn't need massive funding at all. It's international security responsibilities are an accomplished failure, almost entirely at the discretion of some shady bureaucrats and unless it's reformed deeply and in essence to ensure enforcing and compliance I see no practical reasons to keep pretending that it's doing anything useful.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I think it's increasingly clear that any UN body controlled by the General Assembly is apt to be corrupt due to the GA being made up of mostly dictatorship countries.

The corruption is rooted in the Security Council, who've all propped up, employed and empowered many of those very same dictatorships in the GA.

In the immortal words of Hamish the UNSC is a

image.png.1367ed4741b5018c6332570bb8643029.png

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our current situation in the UNSC is a parody combined with a persuasive demonstration of a triumph of a pure, distilled evil. If intelligent aliens saw and read it, no way they could figure out what this humanity is about and would fire off asap and as far as the Universe would allow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, myata said:

Our current situation in the UNSC is a parody combined with a persuasive demonstration of a triumph of a pure, distilled evil. If intelligent aliens saw and read it, no way they could figure out what this humanity is about and would fire off asap and as far as the Universe would allow it.

Well if they didn't know our history, I suppose.  After two world wars, there was an opportunity to build a coalition for peace and the so-called victors did so.

I am interested in hearing ideas about reforming the UNSC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I am interested in hearing ideas about reforming the UNSC.

In the world section

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

to build a coalition for peace and the so-called victors did so

Based on just pretty words, only? Has this idea worked like ever, one time in the entire history?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are you saying that the UN hasn't achieved anything?

Please read Michael: international security mechanism. Yes, in the recent period of say, two or three decades it has not achieved any results on the scale and scope of the claim of a functional global security mechanism. Anything that was done, could have been done by just local or regional effort. There are glaring obvious problems to which there's no solutions and none was even attempted, in earnest. What's the point in having, and paying for a Cadillac if we're only going to ride a bicycle? It's just not real.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

the implication being it worked to some degree before then...

To a very limited degree again far from the overreaching claim.. that was obviously misguided and not grounded in the reality. It was based on an illusion of grandeur post WWII and an amazing wish to ignore the reality. Anything functional needs to have, just cannot work without only a few basic things: clear principles; determination of compliance; and enforcement. It has only the first one, that is, just words. And that never worked, in the entire history, not once. Catholic church didn't work for Heavens sake, despite all the holy words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, myata said:

 Catholic church didn't work for Heavens sake, despite all the holy words.

The Catholic church didn't work? Billions of adherents? Billions of dollars? Incalculable influence? Arguably the greatest cultural force in human history? 

Tough crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I am interested in hearing ideas about reforming the UNSC.

no need for reform, Old Bean

it's a forum wherein the Great Powers Jaw, Jaw, Jaw rather than War, War, War

mission accomplished

all attempts to remake it into a legislative body are folly

since that would only incite World War Three very soon thereafter

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2024 at 10:25 AM, eyeball said:

Because it's the year 2024 ffs.

We should be at the point where we're electing global parliaments by now.

Moronic idea. The first thing such a parliament would do would be to vote in a 98% tax rate for any income over about $10,000 a year to drain the West of money in order to funnel it into the third world. That's where the votes are, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the prosecutor who wants to charge Netenyahu with war crimes has exceeded his and the court's authority. First, because Israel is not a signator to the convention and not a member of the ICC. Second, because the court's jurisdiction is only supposed to be against those who don't live in jurisdictions where crimes can be brought before an independent court. Which Israel has.

If Khan actually wants to pursue brutal crimes against civilians he should try doing it at home in the Kashmir against his own government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

I would argue that the Reformation has surpassed the Harlot of Babylon as the greatest cultural force

the American Hegemony being entirely Orange in its origin

the greatest civilization of all, standards of living beyond the wildest dreams of Antiquity

God given rights with no man nor office between you and the Almighty, an epoch of emancipation

all flowing from the Protestant Enlightenment

banks of the Boyne River, 1 July 1690

God save the King

You might like Meta Modernism.  It's an attempt to fold postmodernism into modernism.

 

As in "Sure, sure ... Western thought is simply the playing field of the patriarchal spectre etc etc, but I'm pretty sure you still go to the dentist right?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warrant of the ICJ orders the states-signatories to arrest the alleged criminals and deliver them to the court. The states most active in the recent decisions: Brazil and South Africa officially expressed doubts in enforcing its order in their territories. What kind of travesty is that?

This is the real, actual and palpable danger and damage of this kind of words-only, imaginary institutions: folks really get used to the stark different between the words and the reality and stop noticing it. Here, I signed the great charter; no lets rob them of their land and have a mirage of "peace".

The danger is real, it's right here. The benefits, few and far between. The promise, who cares about another wishful, impossible dream? Teenagers have those in dozens every night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You might like Meta Modernism.  It's an attempt to fold postmodernism into modernism.

I like the reasonable enjoyment of my property, with my beloved wife of 25 years

my only ideology is to secure my rights, freedoms, & liberties therein

by the Constitution Act

"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,750
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...