Our laws plainly spell out that if a state is interfering with aid distribution, aid and weapons to them must stop. Biden refused to admit that Israel was interfering with aid distribution in any way. According to Biden the gazans have food aid and aid workers have not been interfered with. I dont see how this violation can possibly be debated.
In the face of strenuous complaints by congress, Biden refused to admit that Israel could plausibly be involved in genocide, which would have triggered automatic safeguards in the Leahy laws and other laws around shipment of weapons and giving of foreign monetary aid.
Israel/Biden also repeatedly and consistently violated the geneva conventions, which we are a signatory of, so thats binding law in our legal system. That makes him a war criminal with blood on his hands.
Biden swore an oath to faithfully execute our laws, which he grossly violated, doing massive amounts of grievous criminal harm. These are the very definition of “high crimes”.
You’re claiming that Biden broke laws while in office. There’s a strong argument to be made that he did (like every other US president since Eisenhower). That would have been a case for impeachment. It’s not like Biden was in a coma or otherwise unable to carry out his oath of office due to incapacity, which is what the 25th is for. And the threshold for invoking the 25th is far higher than having looked feeble in a debate.
strenuous complaints by congress
When did a Congressional majority make such a complaint? There are painfully few Congressional voices that challenge the morally bankrupt US policy in that region. In fact, huge part of the underlying problem with US policy towards Israel and the Palestinians is that Congress has never been impartial.
A war crime, a serious violation of international humanitarian law, is a breach of the laws or customs of war committed in the context of an armed conflict, whether international or non-international, and can lead to individual criminal responsibility.
Here’s a breakdown of what qualifies as a war crime:
Key Elements:
Context:
War crimes always occur within the context of an armed conflict, whether international (between states) or non-international (internal conflicts).
Violation of International Law:
They involve serious breaches of the laws and customs of war, as defined in international treaties like the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Individual Responsibility:
Perpetrators of war crimes incur individual criminal responsibility under international law.
Examples of War Crimes:
Attacks Against Civilians: Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population or civilian objects.
Torture and Cruel Treatment: Inflicting torture, cruel treatment, or inhuman treatment on prisoners of war or civilians.
Taking Hostages: Taking hostages.
Pillaging: Pillaging or looting property.
Sexual Violence: Rape, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy, or any other form of sexual violence.
Use of Prohibited Weapons: Using weapons that cause unnecessary suffering or are prohibited by international law, such as chemical weapons or cluster munitions.
Disregard for the Wounded and Sick: Attacking medical personnel, facilities, or transports, or preventing them from carrying out their duties.
Deportation or Transfer of Populations: Forcibly deporting or transferring populations from their homes.
Use of Child Soldiers: Enlisting or using children under the age of 15 in armed conflict.
Killing or Wounding Surrendered Combatants: Killing or wounding combatants who have surrendered or are hors de combat (out of action).
Important Considerations:
Proportionality:
Military actions must be proportionate, meaning the harm caused to civilians and civilian objects must not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.
Distinction:
Military actions must distinguish between civilians and combatants, and between military objectives and civilian objects.
Necessity:
Military actions must be necessary to achieve a legitimate military objective and should not cause unnecessary suffering.
Humanity:
Military actions must be conducted with humanity and should avoid unnecessary suffering.
the United States signed the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on September 25, 2013, which establishes common standards for the international trade of conventional weapons and aims to prevent transfers that could fuel genocide, war crimes, and other human rights abuses.
Article 6 addresses explicitly prohibitions against arms transfers that would be contrary to international legal obligations, or where the State knows the arms would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity and certain war crimes. This provision sets a clear benchmark to allow States parties to effectively and consistently implement these prohibitions.
In the 1949 geneva conventions, referred to as the IHL, signed by the US:
War crimes – serious violations of international humanitarian law that include wilful killings, direct attacks on civilians, torture, use of prohibited weapons, the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or others who have been captured, surrendered or injured and crimes of sexual violence.
Crimes against humanity – crimes committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack by or on behalf of a state or an organization against a civilian population during peace or wartime. There are 11 crimes against humanity including murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or forcible transfer of a population, torture, rape and other serious forms of sexual violence, enforced disappearance and apartheid. Crimes against humanity may be committed in armed conflict or in peacetime.
Genocide – certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, completely or partially, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Genocide may be committed in armed conflict or in peacetime.
In Us law Biden violated the Leahy act and the arms export control act.
Glad I could help you out and make you better informed. Also check these.
You’re listing laws, many of which could apply to Israel’s conduct in Gaza. But when it comes to direct actions that the US took under Biden, you only cite the Leahy Act and the Arms Export Control Act, neither of which is international law, and the breach of neither of which constitutes genocide (though it’s undeniable that the US’s actions contribute to genocide). And the enforcement of both the Leahy Act and the ACDA is a joke. The Leahy Act forbids the US government from supplying arms to nations that the US Department of State finds to be abusing human rights. In other words, it’s the US policing itself. Simlarly, the AECA gives the President the power to require that recipients of US armaments are allowed to use them only for “legitimate self-defense.” And the President gets to decide who that is and what constitutes a breach.
Unless you are arguing that, according to international law, anyone involved in the arms trade is guilty of genocide if someone it sells to commits genocide? OK, then how many prosecutions have occurred for cases like that that the Hague? I’d like to see the international system work like that, but it doesn’t. As best I can tell, that number is zero.
Glad I could help you out and make you better informed.
It’s not a good look to be patronizing when you don’t know what you’re talking about. Your whole line of argument is nothing but begging the question.
The point is whether the 25th amendment should have been invoked.
If the conditions were met, then other past presidents doing the same thing just means the 25th amendment should have been invoked in those situations as well.
None of this has anything to do with the 25th Amendment. The 25th is the process for removing a president from office in the event of physical or mental disability to severe that the President can no longer carry out the duties of office.
Committing war crimes doesn’t trigger the 25th. Neither does breaking any other law. Those are what impeachment is for, and (ignoring the Supreme Court’s recent unlawful establishment of an elective absolute monarchy) enforcement of the law against the President, in those cases where there are criminal penalties.
Thank you for clarifying. In that case the rebuttal to kreskin above should be that the 25th amendment does not apply to crimes, rather than that many presidents commit crimes.
Btw, as an outsider I’m pressing X to doubt that anyone will ever be able to successfully invoke the 25th amendment. It will be even harder than impeaching. None of the people involved are willing to relinquish power and independent access to determine their puppet’s dementia would be impossible.
Yeah, the barrier to actually using the 25th is absurdly high, and a president with dementia could cling to office by the simple expedient of objecting to the finding of incapacity. The amendment regards that as sufficient evidence that the president can carry out his duties. And if a VP chose to protect an incapacitated president from removal from office, the process could be derailed that way, too.
As for rebutting Kreskin, I think I’m done attempting to reason with them. Instead, I’ll try teaching my dog to play chess, it’s more likely I’ll succeed at that.
Ok, so def like -100 karma points for Biden, but it’s kind of petty to focus on that when Trump was already at like -20 million before he even took office
I mean there is, thats why if you break the law and speed you get a ticket and pay a fine, but if you break the law and commit premeditated homicide, you get life in prison.
The issue is that laws have to be applied evenly to everyone, and penalties need to scale with income level. They need to be both punitive and prohibitive to EVERYONE.
What did Biden do that warranted invoking the 25th? I suspect if you think it should have with him, it should have with every president.
Our laws plainly spell out that if a state is interfering with aid distribution, aid and weapons to them must stop. Biden refused to admit that Israel was interfering with aid distribution in any way. According to Biden the gazans have food aid and aid workers have not been interfered with. I dont see how this violation can possibly be debated.
In the face of strenuous complaints by congress, Biden refused to admit that Israel could plausibly be involved in genocide, which would have triggered automatic safeguards in the Leahy laws and other laws around shipment of weapons and giving of foreign monetary aid.
Israel/Biden also repeatedly and consistently violated the geneva conventions, which we are a signatory of, so thats binding law in our legal system. That makes him a war criminal with blood on his hands.
Biden swore an oath to faithfully execute our laws, which he grossly violated, doing massive amounts of grievous criminal harm. These are the very definition of “high crimes”.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/leahy-law-israel
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/17/palestine-israel-leahy-lawsuit
You’re claiming that Biden broke laws while in office. There’s a strong argument to be made that he did (like every other US president since Eisenhower). That would have been a case for impeachment. It’s not like Biden was in a coma or otherwise unable to carry out his oath of office due to incapacity, which is what the 25th is for. And the threshold for invoking the 25th is far higher than having looked feeble in a debate.
When did a Congressional majority make such a complaint? There are painfully few Congressional voices that challenge the morally bankrupt US policy in that region. In fact, huge part of the underlying problem with US policy towards Israel and the Palestinians is that Congress has never been impartial.
Oh come on, that’s ridiculous. I was with you calling Biden an enabler for Israel’s actions in Gaza, but I just don’t see the leap to war crime
Well we can google what is a war crime.
Lets do that:
What qualifies as a war crime?
A war crime, a serious violation of international humanitarian law, is a breach of the laws or customs of war committed in the context of an armed conflict, whether international or non-international, and can lead to individual criminal responsibility.
Here’s a breakdown of what qualifies as a war crime: Key Elements:
Context: War crimes always occur within the context of an armed conflict, whether international (between states) or non-international (internal conflicts).
Violation of International Law: They involve serious breaches of the laws and customs of war, as defined in international treaties like the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Individual Responsibility: Perpetrators of war crimes incur individual criminal responsibility under international law.
Examples of War Crimes: Attacks Against Civilians: Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population or civilian objects.
Torture and Cruel Treatment: Inflicting torture, cruel treatment, or inhuman treatment on prisoners of war or civilians.
Taking Hostages: Taking hostages.
Pillaging: Pillaging or looting property.
Sexual Violence: Rape, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy, or any other form of sexual violence.
Use of Prohibited Weapons: Using weapons that cause unnecessary suffering or are prohibited by international law, such as chemical weapons or cluster munitions.
Disregard for the Wounded and Sick: Attacking medical personnel, facilities, or transports, or preventing them from carrying out their duties.
Deportation or Transfer of Populations: Forcibly deporting or transferring populations from their homes.
Use of Child Soldiers: Enlisting or using children under the age of 15 in armed conflict.
Killing or Wounding Surrendered Combatants: Killing or wounding combatants who have surrendered or are hors de combat (out of action).
Important Considerations:
Proportionality:
Military actions must be proportionate, meaning the harm caused to civilians and civilian objects must not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.
Distinction: Military actions must distinguish between civilians and combatants, and between military objectives and civilian objects.
Necessity: Military actions must be necessary to achieve a legitimate military objective and should not cause unnecessary suffering.
Humanity: Military actions must be conducted with humanity and should avoid unnecessary suffering.
Which of those did Biden commit?
I’ll just block you instead. You clearly arent worth the time for me or anyone else to reply to.
What US military action has taken place in Gaza?
Let me help you: none. The US has supported a state that is committing war crimes. Show me where in international law that is defined as a war crime.
the United States signed the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on September 25, 2013, which establishes common standards for the international trade of conventional weapons and aims to prevent transfers that could fuel genocide, war crimes, and other human rights abuses.
Article 6 addresses explicitly prohibitions against arms transfers that would be contrary to international legal obligations, or where the State knows the arms would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity and certain war crimes. This provision sets a clear benchmark to allow States parties to effectively and consistently implement these prohibitions.
https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/att/att.html
In the 1949 geneva conventions, referred to as the IHL, signed by the US: War crimes – serious violations of international humanitarian law that include wilful killings, direct attacks on civilians, torture, use of prohibited weapons, the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or others who have been captured, surrendered or injured and crimes of sexual violence.
Crimes against humanity – crimes committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack by or on behalf of a state or an organization against a civilian population during peace or wartime. There are 11 crimes against humanity including murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or forcible transfer of a population, torture, rape and other serious forms of sexual violence, enforced disappearance and apartheid. Crimes against humanity may be committed in armed conflict or in peacetime.
Genocide – certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, completely or partially, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Genocide may be committed in armed conflict or in peacetime.
In Us law Biden violated the Leahy act and the arms export control act.
Glad I could help you out and make you better informed. Also check these.
https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/amnesty-international-warns-of-u-s-complicity-in-war-crimes-in-gaza/
https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/us-weapons-to-israel
You’re listing laws, many of which could apply to Israel’s conduct in Gaza. But when it comes to direct actions that the US took under Biden, you only cite the Leahy Act and the Arms Export Control Act, neither of which is international law, and the breach of neither of which constitutes genocide (though it’s undeniable that the US’s actions contribute to genocide). And the enforcement of both the Leahy Act and the ACDA is a joke. The Leahy Act forbids the US government from supplying arms to nations that the US Department of State finds to be abusing human rights. In other words, it’s the US policing itself. Simlarly, the AECA gives the President the power to require that recipients of US armaments are allowed to use them only for “legitimate self-defense.” And the President gets to decide who that is and what constitutes a breach.
Unless you are arguing that, according to international law, anyone involved in the arms trade is guilty of genocide if someone it sells to commits genocide? OK, then how many prosecutions have occurred for cases like that that the Hague? I’d like to see the international system work like that, but it doesn’t. As best I can tell, that number is zero.
It’s not a good look to be patronizing when you don’t know what you’re talking about. Your whole line of argument is nothing but begging the question.
And that’s different than what any other US president would have done? Kowtowing to Israel is US government policy.
that changes nothing….
and Isreal has been acting much worse than they were before… although it was still genocidal
Nothing different. I’d argue that’s another indicator that the US’s ‘health’ has been bad for a long time.
The point is whether the 25th amendment should have been invoked.
If the conditions were met, then other past presidents doing the same thing just means the 25th amendment should have been invoked in those situations as well.
None of this has anything to do with the 25th Amendment. The 25th is the process for removing a president from office in the event of physical or mental disability to severe that the President can no longer carry out the duties of office.
Committing war crimes doesn’t trigger the 25th. Neither does breaking any other law. Those are what impeachment is for, and (ignoring the Supreme Court’s recent unlawful establishment of an elective absolute monarchy) enforcement of the law against the President, in those cases where there are criminal penalties.
Thank you for clarifying. In that case the rebuttal to kreskin above should be that the 25th amendment does not apply to crimes, rather than that many presidents commit crimes.
Btw, as an outsider I’m pressing X to doubt that anyone will ever be able to successfully invoke the 25th amendment. It will be even harder than impeaching. None of the people involved are willing to relinquish power and independent access to determine their puppet’s dementia would be impossible.
Yeah, the barrier to actually using the 25th is absurdly high, and a president with dementia could cling to office by the simple expedient of objecting to the finding of incapacity. The amendment regards that as sufficient evidence that the president can carry out his duties. And if a VP chose to protect an incapacitated president from removal from office, the process could be derailed that way, too.
As for rebutting Kreskin, I think I’m done attempting to reason with them. Instead, I’ll try teaching my dog to play chess, it’s more likely I’ll succeed at that.
Ok, so def like -100 karma points for Biden, but it’s kind of petty to focus on that when Trump was already at like -20 million before he even took office
Is there some rule that we just imprison whichever one lawbreaker is worst? I dont think thats how laws work. Supposedly we are a nation of laws.
I mean there is, thats why if you break the law and speed you get a ticket and pay a fine, but if you break the law and commit premeditated homicide, you get life in prison.
The issue is that laws have to be applied evenly to everyone, and penalties need to scale with income level. They need to be both punitive and prohibitive to EVERYONE.
If the law were enforced to the max with no exceptions, everyone would be imprisoned.
Kyle Rittenhouse has entered the chat