Skip to comments.
US withdraws UN measure on immunity for US soldiers
Reuters ^
| 6/23/04
Posted on 06/23/2004 9:54:25 AM PDT by areafiftyone
UNITED NATIONS, June 23 (Reuters) - The United States announced on Wednesday it was withdrawing its U.N. Security Council resolution seeking an exemption for U.S. soldiers from the new International Criminal Court because of lack of support.
James Cunningham, the U.S. deputy ambassador, told reporters, "We are dropping action on this resolution."
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: icc; iccsucks; un
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-111 next last
We should withdraw all of our soldiers from UN missions as well.
2
posted on
06/23/2004 9:56:04 AM PDT
by
oolatec
To: areafiftyone
i wish we would drop the whole UN thing
3
posted on
06/23/2004 9:56:07 AM PDT
by
DM1
To: oolatec
We should get the UN out of NY and send it to Europe where it belongs!
4
posted on
06/23/2004 9:57:03 AM PDT
by
areafiftyone
(Democrats = the hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning)
To: oolatec
5
posted on
06/23/2004 9:57:18 AM PDT
by
p. henry
To: FBD; Mudboy Slim; sultan88
6
posted on
06/23/2004 9:57:33 AM PDT
by
jla
(http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
To: areafiftyone

The stupid Euro-Globalists will think that they've won a great victory here until our immunity runs out and we then withdraw all American peacekeepers from areas such as Bosnia and Kosovo.
They have no clue about what is about to happen globally.
No immunity = no American peacekeepers
7
posted on
06/23/2004 9:57:56 AM PDT
by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: areafiftyone
No immunity, no money to the UN.
8
posted on
06/23/2004 9:58:23 AM PDT
by
Maceman
(Too nuanced for a bumper sticker)
To: areafiftyone
Why? This opens the US to be controlled by its enemies. France, Germany and Russia are just waiting to stick it to us like they did last year. How about these 3rd world countries dictators looking for any monies anywhere who are just waiting to collect add'l monies from the US taxpayers. Or, the arab countries who setup the problems and then get the West to dig them out at the West's expense. This has far reaching implications. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Pres Bush: Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!!!!!
9
posted on
06/23/2004 9:59:13 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: areafiftyone
Or better yet, Africa - preferrably a Moslem-dominated place! Couldn't the reach out directly there, and spread love and harmony? Wouldn't it serve better in the heart of strife and chaos?
10
posted on
06/23/2004 9:59:59 AM PDT
by
the OlLine Rebel
(I was there! I passed Reagan's casket 6/10 3:40 PM!)
To: lilylangtree
No, we need to stay in the UN to have fun with our veto and prevent harm.
But, we can veto every peacekeeping operation and remove American troops and American money from the equation. As Andrew Jackson said of Chief Justice Marshall's decision on nullifcation: "Mr. Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."
11
posted on
06/23/2004 10:02:20 AM PDT
by
CatoRenasci
(Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
To: areafiftyone
I don't know that this means we've decided to recognize the authority of the ICC. If they somehow were to get a hold of one of our soldiers and pull him in front of their kangaroo court, would we see a Delta Force Rescue mission with lots of blue hat casualties?
Owl_Eagle
Guns Before Butter.
To: Southack
No immunity = no American peacekeepers Don't get upset when that equation doesn't hold.
13
posted on
06/23/2004 10:03:56 AM PDT
by
GraniteStateConservative
(...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
To: lilylangtree
A deceptive headline. This does not mean the US is going to sign the treaty.
To: areafiftyone
I'm very interested in what our administration will do next.
15
posted on
06/23/2004 10:07:43 AM PDT
by
k2blader
(It is neither compassionate nor conservative to support the expansion of socialism.)
To: Owl_Eagle
If they somehow were to get a hold of one of our soldiers and pull him in front of their kangaroo court, would we see a Delta Force Rescue mission with lots of blue hat casualties? That would certainly clarify things. The whole ICC gambit is an exercise in illegitimacy. For the UN to claim global jurisdiction upon ratification of the treaty by only 60 countries is the most blatant attack upon the principal of nationhood in history.
16
posted on
06/23/2004 10:08:46 AM PDT
by
Carry_Okie
(The Fourth Estate is the Fifth Column)
To: Carry_Okie
I wish Ashcroft would indict the UN under RICO statutes.
17
posted on
06/23/2004 10:11:53 AM PDT
by
adam_az
(Call your State Republican Party office and VOLUNTEER!!!!)
To: k2blader
We have 89 bilateral agreements with various countries that ensure that they will not bring cases to that court involving US personnel. I assume we will continue to expand the list as fast as we can.
18
posted on
06/23/2004 10:13:42 AM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: GraniteStateConservative
"Don't get upset when that equation doesn't hold."
Don't get upset when it does.
19
posted on
06/23/2004 10:18:03 AM PDT
by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: the OlLine Rebel
But Africa doesn't have those wonderful expensive gourmet restaurants like NY does!
20
posted on
06/23/2004 10:21:19 AM PDT
by
expatpat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-111 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson