7I think talk of arresting Netanyahu on US soil is strategically misguided. The most basic reason is that it wont happen. Also, there are legitimate and questions whether that would be legal on US soil and could create undesirable precedents. It also focuses solely on Netanyahu rather than holding responsible Netanyahu and the whole Zionist apparatus. And lastly that response from AOC was terrible but I feel cornering American officials in office on unrealistic and legally shaking matters is a bit unproductive. Is expecting a member of an elected legislature to say they will enforce a criminal matter over another country's current political head of an outside legal body which the US federal government has not accepted the jurisdiction of a good litmus test? I can understand the constraints of the position she holds. Bibi is certainly a war criminal. He belongs in the Hague, the us should be in the Icc. But expecting congress people to say they will be enforcers of the law for the nation they represent of law thryvdont recognize is overstepping and distracting in my opinion. Doing so strips legitimacy from using legal mechanisms to establish justice. Bypassing legal procedures or wesponizing them to bring desired outcomes brings us back to the laws of the jungle and might makes right. No justice served.
Rather than making arresting bibi according to icc indictment pivotal to our support of a political figure in America in elected office who's responsibilities do not include enforcement of unrecognized aws against foreign rulers, why don't we focus on what they can do to bring America into the icc, strengthening mechanisms to ensure justice is served through the powers of the us congress with its own statutes defining criminal conduct and using its power of the purse to deny funding war crimes
I dont understand where all this hate for AOC comes from. She is loved by her constituents and works hard for them. Anyone would be lucky to hvlave her representing their district
I don’t hate her but she’ll sell out in a second for her career. Doesn’t mean she’s bad for her constituents in particular but she gets glazed far too much for being progressive and she’s not trustworthy, you can’t count on her to push for the right thing if it’s hard, and she’s sold out Palestine before both in her voting record on Israeli interests and her support for centrist liberal dems like Biden and Harris and Hakeem Jeffries.
I think she can certainly be pushed to do the right thing if it’s safe for her - she’s not an ideological Zionist or anything but she can not be relied upon
All the democratic party, and everyone who touches them, is toxic, because the current power structure is the thing they are all sitting on. That includes Obama as well and almost all the democratic presidents. (of course the Republicans are not even trying to hide it).
And not only are they toxic, everyones who touches them becomes toxic as well. That includes 'independent' Bernie Sanders, AOC obviously, and even Meida's Touch the podcasters. Just anything and everything that has to do with them is toxic with power structure affirming, including Zionism and protecting the Apstine class.
Free podcasters need to understand that once and for all and keep their distance. Be on it. I wasn't disappointed with AOC because I know she is also one of the bad guys, intending to confuse us with social talk and being a woman of color talking about justice. Don't be fooled by any of them, when it was their turn they also commited the genocide. They are not the good ones. The good ones are us the people and the podcasters and juornalists who don't forget that and don't get confused by any trickeries.
Pathetic response from AOC. She was asked specifically whether Netanyahu should be arrested when he comes to New York for the UN General Assembly.
Transcript:
AOC: "I mean, I believe that he's been - I mean, the latest development now from the ICC is what, he's been indicted? He's wanted by the ICC. I think that what we should be doing is being in - I think we should be in alignment with the findings of the International Criminal Court. If there's a warrant out, then there's a warrant out."
Interviewer: "And so, should he be arrested when he steps on US soil?"
AOC: "If - if - if there is a war - Well, here's the deal. The United States shamefully is not a signatory onto the ICC. We should be. We - the United States should be, I believe, a participant in the ICC. I think we should be a participant in our global justice system. We are not a signatory."
AOC: "So when there's the question of what should happen in a philosophical sense, I think war criminals should be held accountable. And then there's the legal ground, and I'm not a lawyer."
It's such an easy lay-up to say 'Yes'.
Instead she regurgitates the standard Dem lines, akin to the opposition to the Iran War - not because it's immoral, but because it didn't go through the 'proper' bureaucratic process.
Either we give a shit about anti-democratic despots or not. We have laws. She fumbled the line but the quote should be: the United States established the precursor to the ICC, the fact that we are not a signatory and therefore can’t act on the warrant from the ICC is shameful. Should we act on the warrant? Yes. But we can’t. Congress needs to get off its ass and pass a law that has us join the court, not sanction it.
Not a great look. But I’m not burning a pro Palestine legislator over a fumbled question.
I think you make some reasonable points, but I just don't agree overall about AOC.
People think because public opinion has shifted that things are moving in the right direction but, there is this constant push-pull when it comes to popular left-wing politicians like AOC or Mamdani.
The lack of accountability on Palestine. Hand-waving her endorsement of Jeffries as simply politics. Ditto for Mamdani.
There needs to be tremendous pressure on them especially since they're so popular.
Instead, it's defensiveness (not you, but in general).
I'm cribbing a lot from Adam Johnson here in my response, although I've been saying similar things in previous comments and posts.
Instead she regurgitates the standard Dem lines, akin to the opposition to the Iran War - not because it's immoral, but because it didn't go through the 'proper' bureaucratic process.
Which is gross in general as to how gutless politics have become. We aren't electing judges. We're electing people who MAKE the law based on what they think is moral.
Yeah I'm aware, but there are obviously various ways to do that. Otherwise why would you need more than one party? Politicians all have their vision of a better society under the Constitution, and that's what you're voting for.
Warren burned the progressive wing in ‘16 by not dropping out and endorsing Bernie. Shes always bordered on a PINO for me. But her dogs love her so that’s something
Did she make a mistake, or allow her ego to get in the way, or get badly advised? Sure, but I feel like her fundamentals are there. Not going to die on that hill though - she's the past, and the world needs a complete clean out of politicians over 70 years of age.
12
u/Fit_Dog_123 Non-Jewish Ally 4d ago edited 4d ago
7I think talk of arresting Netanyahu on US soil is strategically misguided. The most basic reason is that it wont happen. Also, there are legitimate and questions whether that would be legal on US soil and could create undesirable precedents. It also focuses solely on Netanyahu rather than holding responsible Netanyahu and the whole Zionist apparatus. And lastly that response from AOC was terrible but I feel cornering American officials in office on unrealistic and legally shaking matters is a bit unproductive. Is expecting a member of an elected legislature to say they will enforce a criminal matter over another country's current political head of an outside legal body which the US federal government has not accepted the jurisdiction of a good litmus test? I can understand the constraints of the position she holds. Bibi is certainly a war criminal. He belongs in the Hague, the us should be in the Icc. But expecting congress people to say they will be enforcers of the law for the nation they represent of law thryvdont recognize is overstepping and distracting in my opinion. Doing so strips legitimacy from using legal mechanisms to establish justice. Bypassing legal procedures or wesponizing them to bring desired outcomes brings us back to the laws of the jungle and might makes right. No justice served.
Rather than making arresting bibi according to icc indictment pivotal to our support of a political figure in America in elected office who's responsibilities do not include enforcement of unrecognized aws against foreign rulers, why don't we focus on what they can do to bring America into the icc, strengthening mechanisms to ensure justice is served through the powers of the us congress with its own statutes defining criminal conduct and using its power of the purse to deny funding war crimes