this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
338 points (92.7% liked)

Political Memes

9162 readers
4106 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not worthless. But it certainly doesn't have the power of law.

International ~~law~~ strongly worded email

[–] Wooki@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

ISDS is actually above the law sooooooooooooooooooooooo

Edit: see my youtube video i replied to OP with, its depressing s**t.

[–] KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

To all the people complaining about toothless international law:

To become binding, law needs law enforcement. Which, in the case of international law, would mean an international police force that has jurisdiction over all the world's governments, and a mandate to arrest even heads of states if they are suspected of committing a crime.
For that, they'd need sufficient military power to beat any nation's armies (which would definitely be deployed to protect the head of state).

So basically, every time a nation's leader is suspected of committing a crime against international law (by whom?), a war starts.
Is that really what you want?

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Or, hear me out... I personally fly out to the asteroid belt, build a space station inside the asteroid Vesta manufacturing Rods from God, and periodically fling them at the military installations and centers of government of nations that make me angry. Maybe I even give my operation a pretentious name, like "Damocles Initiative" or "Office of Government Accountability."

Honestly, I see no way this could go wrong. Who watches the watchers? I do.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Or an agreement that sets everyone else against you if you violate it.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Do you want international law to do something instead of being a worthless book that everyone ignores?

yes

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If we could assume that said international forces were moral and behaved well, fuck yes that's what I would want.

There needn't be a war everytime. The international forces would simply let the country know that they want person X or X, Y and Z and that if they don't get to, then there'd be war. And all they need to do is give up a person who's probably actually broken international laws, which aren't usually minor ones.

Given that I've assumed the morality and good behaviour of this force, then it should be no problem.

And at that point, there wouldn't be a need for national armies, if there was an international force that was wholly good and did have the capacity to beat any one other militaries.

[–] KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There needn’t be a war everytime. The international forces would simply let the country know that they want person X or X, Y and Z and that if they don’t get to, then there’d be war. And all they need to do is give up a person who’s probably actually broken international laws, which aren’t usually minor ones.

That worked so well in Afghanistan!

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Uh, we're talking about a hypothetical scenario in which theres already enough international cooperation that there exist an actually powerful international police force strong enough to take on any military.

That would imply such a high level of international cooperation, that most countries would know fighting against the force would be like some crack addict trying to fight the cops.

A completely hypothetical situation which doesn't reflect real life politics.

[–] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Where the rules are made up, and treaties don't matter

[–] Napain@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

ever heard of wto?

[–] Wooki@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)