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.
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.