Kauboj, taj je sud znaci nadlezan i za Middle East?

Pa u teoriji trebao bi biti, ali...  uostalom, evo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court

As of November 2008, 108 countries have joined the Court, including nearly all of Europe and South America, and roughly half the countries in Africa.^[6][7][8] However, these countries only account for a minority of the world's population.^[26]

A further 40 states have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute;^[6] the law of treaties obliges these states to refrain from “acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty.^[27] In 2002, two of these states, the United States and Israel, "unsigned" the Rome Statute, indicating that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, they have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the statute.

Medjunarodni Sud Pravde je uvek postojao (iako je retko nešto i radio!), ali mislim da se za ozbiljne slučajeve kršenja ljudskih prava i konvencija o ratovanju osnivaju posebni, tzv. "Tribunali".

naravno da nije sve crno - bijelo, ali je samo jedna strana u ovom sukobu ubila preko 200 djece!

Koje gluposti stavljaš čovječe, ne bio znali da su Hamas teroristi da nije bilo tebe  radi se o Izraelu i običnim Palestincima, što je IDF ako su pobili i više civila od Hamasa, super teroristi? Teroristi 2000? Kako njih zvati?

Ako Amerika i Izrael nemaju šta skrivati nema razloga da ne stave svoje vojnike i generale pod nadležnost suda za ratne zločine no svi znamo da imaju krvi na rukama.

Evo o čemu sam pričao: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes

The UN's senior human rights body approved a resolution yesterday condemning the Israeli offensive for "massive violations of human rights". A senior UN source said the body's humanitarian agencies were compiling evidence of war crimes and passing it on to the "highest levels" to be used as seen fit.

Some human rights activists allege that the Israeli leadership gave an order to keep military casualties low no matter what cost to civilians. That strategy has directly contributed to one of the bloodiest Israeli assaults on the Palestinian territories, they say.

John Ging, head of the UN Palestinian refugee agency in Gaza, said: "It's about accountability [over] the issue of the appropriateness of the force used, the proportionality of the force used and the whole issue of duty of care of civilians.

"We don't want to join any chorus of passing judgment but there should be an investigation of any and every incident where there are concerns there might have been violations in international law."

The Israeli military are accused of:

• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;

• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;

• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;

• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;

• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.

Human Rights Watch has called on the UN security council to set up a commission of inquiry into alleged war crimes.

Two leading Israeli human rights organisations have separately written to the country's attorney general demanding he investigate the allegations.

But critics remain sceptical that any such inquiry will take place, given that Israel has previously blocked similar attempts with the backing of the US.

Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".

Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.

While there are growing calls for an international investigation, the form it would take is less clear. The UN's human rights council has the authority to investigate allegations of war crimes but Israel has blocked its previous attempts to do so. The UN security council could order an investigation, and even set up a war crimes tribunal, but that is likely to be vetoed by the US and probably Britain.

The international criminal court has no jurisdiction because Israel is not a signatory. The UN security council could refer the matter to the court but is unlikely to.

Ajde ti meni nesto iskreno reci, zasto se vi (ti, i ostali humanitarno orjentirani) niste jednako ovako zgrazali nad pokoljem ne tisuca, vec stotina i stotina tisuca africkih crnaca u Sudanu, ili one djece u Beslanu, sve pocinjeno rukom "islamskih boraca za slobodu".

Nisam primjetio neko zgrazanje i osudu nad tim zlocinima, da ne kazem u ovoj mjeri.

Zasto ste tako parcijalno humanitrani, pitanje svih pitanja.

Dok je NATO ravnao srbijanska sela i gradove, slavilo se (iako NATO bombe ne biraju, jednako kao ni izraelske, djeca ginu i od jednih i od drugih) u istim onim masama koje su sada iznenada uplakane zbog smrti palestinske djecice.

Ne mogu licemjerja, pa to ti je.