News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I wonder how much of Biden's outrage is because of support for Bibi, and how much of it is because the ICC could start issuing warrant for US presidents?
The US already has a law in place that stipulates that the president can use all means necessary, including military action, to release any US personnel that have been arrested by the ICC.
They aren’t afraid that the ICC is going to issue a warrant for a US president. Because they can just park their aircraft carriers in the North Sea near The Hague beach and invade Dutch airspace. And what is the EU going to do in that case? US already has troops and equipment on EU soil.
While they can do so, that's a very effective way to permanently destroy relations between the EU and the US. The US will be unable to effectively project power onto both Europe and the Middle East once the military bases in Europe are closed down in the aftermath. It will be the US's biggest loss in soft power since its founding.
ICC arrest warrants are not about actually detaining people, Bibi won't end up in the Hague either.
The point is isolation. If the US president would get convicted, they wouldn't be able to attend a G7 summit anymore for example.
The Netherlands could invoke NATO article 5, no?
They certainly could try, but who do you think actually enforces NATO?
100% the former. Biden supported the ICC until it started going after his pal. Now he just gave Putin a propaganda freebie.
The U.S. has an infamous history of obstructing the ICC otherwise the previous 3 president's would be potentially facing war crimes charges.
I'm not sure who this propaganda is supposed to appeal towards? The dividing lines between the old Cold War states have sharpened considerably. Biden and Putin can't really do anything wrong, from within their own camps. Its always "Whataboutism" and "You people don't understand what's at stake" to dismiss the incoherent contradiction of their respective policies.
Biden gave ammo to the Russian propaganda when he questioned the legitimacy of the ICC arrest warrants and implicitly accused them of playing politics - which is basically Putin's line. I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up with Putin being allowed to travel freely again.
Who is being propagandized? Everyone's already picked their side.
I seriously doubt it, if for no other reason than any number of armed and extremely angry Ukrainian partisans are gunning for him everywhere he goes. But at some point, countries like South Africa, India, and Brazil are going to be asked to turn down diplomats from an enthusiastic new partner by British or American scald complaining about international norms.
To quote the Kenyan Ambassador Dr Lubinda Haabazoka,
The USA have a law that they have to send the military to Den Haag in case the ICC tries to prosecute any US Soldiers or officials: ASPA or the Hague Invasion Act.
I'm pretty sure the dutch government has laws making such an invasion illegal.
I think everyone has laws making invasions illegal, that does not seem to mean anything to the attackers.
...
I'm pretty sure NATO exists to make such an invasion illegal.
No, wars between members are not covered under NATO
Huh. Now I know that the world isn't as safe as I presumed it to be.
Probably a mix of both. This is an issue that Biden us actually ideological on, he is genuinely a zionist. But he also has that habitual conservative infatuation with the status quo and sitting on fences.