Cable Forum - View Single Post

punky · 14-05-2004, 00:38

The UN would supercede it, purely because it was formed first, and being world-wide, it considers itself all powerful. The whole point I was trying to make though, is that the building is UN, not NATO, so NATO shouldn't come into it.

About the Dutch response: If it was me, i'd turn to the UN and ask them what to do. If they want me to try and stop them, as suicidal as that sounds i'd mobilise the Dutch forces against them. Otherwise, if the UN wouldn't care, what is the point in risk lives, wasting resources, etc.

I never (or never meant to rather) cast aspersions upon the Dutch and i'm raiding the previous pages to try and find how/where I got dragged into it (you seemed to think I was in post #61, but I honestly wasn't/cant see it). The only thing I rememeber trying to say was the the ICC is UN controlled, not NATO. Hence it wouldn't be the US vs NATO, it would be US vs UN (which would be 190 countries). Like I said, u'm sorry if you thought I was, but it was not intentional.

But yeah, it is academic. If we know about the US policy to American war criminals in the ICC, then i'm sure the bloody UN should (although wouldn't suprise if they didn't), so this kind of thing would get headed off before this stage. And anyway, if the US didn't sign up to it, then I don't suppose the UN can legally hold any Americans anyway.

14-05-2004, 00:38	#78
punky Inactive Join Date: Jun 2003 Age: 45 Posts: 14,750	Re: Saddam To Sue Uk The UN would supercede it, purely because it was formed first, and being world-wide, it considers itself all powerful. The whole point I was trying to make though, is that the building is UN, not NATO, so NATO shouldn't come into it. About the Dutch response: If it was me, i'd turn to the UN and ask them what to do. If they want me to try and stop them, as suicidal as that sounds i'd mobilise the Dutch forces against them. Otherwise, if the UN wouldn't care, what is the point in risk lives, wasting resources, etc. I never (or never meant to rather) cast aspersions upon the Dutch and i'm raiding the previous pages to try and find how/where I got dragged into it (you seemed to think I was in post #61, but I honestly wasn't/cant see it). The only thing I rememeber trying to say was the the ICC is UN controlled, not NATO. Hence it wouldn't be the US vs NATO, it would be US vs UN (which would be 190 countries). Like I said, u'm sorry if you thought I was, but it was not intentional. But yeah, it is academic. If we know about the US policy to American war criminals in the ICC, then i'm sure the bloody UN should (although wouldn't suprise if they didn't), so this kind of thing would get headed off before this stage. And anyway, if the US didn't sign up to it, then I don't suppose the UN can legally hold any Americans anyway.