Hat tip to Crusader Rabbit
This is just another example of how far President Barack Hussein Obama will go to destroy the United States and turn us into a Third World Nation.
My feeling is that a decision to do this will result in a lower moral amongst members of the US military. Every 2-bit dictator in the world (Chevez and Ahmadinejad come to mind very fast) will be filing suits against the US and its military for every imagined hurt to them. Can one imagine the chaos that will insue when this happens? Will it even be Consitutional? Would that even matter to Obama? Or his Attorney General, Eric Holder? Will the ICC force the US to adopt strict gun control laws? They can. They can do anything including changing the US Constitution to suit their purposes.
They are feeling good just now at The Hague, as the judges and pen-pushers of the International Criminal Court (ICC) adjourn to smart restaurants to celebrate the latest gesture-politics flexing of their muscles by issuing an arrest warrant for Omar al Bashir, the President of Sudan. They are feeling less good in Darfur, from which 10 international aid agencies were expelled in retaliation within four hours of the ICC initiative, cutting food supplies and closing clinics. One man's ego trip is another man's starvation.
But the people who should be feeling really nervous about this development are the citizens of the United States and more especially their armed forces. The signs are that the grandstanding Barack Obama is preparing to subject the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC. In May, 2002 President Bush withdrew the United States from the Rome Statute which established the ICC. With America heading into global conflict, he had no wish to see US troops arraigned for alleged war crimes before a kangaroo court.
That was a wise decision and probably required in terms of the US Constitution. Already, however, the Obama administration is sending out very different messages. America helped defeat a proposal that the warrant for Bashir should be suspended for 12 months - which would have been a welcome respite for the soup kitchens of Darfur. This is a policy change of considerable significance.
Nor is it the only straw in the wind. Last month US Ambassador Susan Rice, in a closed meeting of the Security Council, supported the ICC, saying it "looks to become an important and credible instrument for trying to hold accountable the senior leadership responsible for atrocities committed in the Congo, Uganda and Darfur". A week later Ben Chang, spokesman for National Security Advisor General James Jones, took a similar line, telling the Washington Times: "We support the ICC in its pursuit of those who've perpetrated war crimes."
The next logical step is for the United States to sign up to the ICC. That would flatter Obama's ego as the conscience of the world. It would also put US servicemen at the mercy of any American-hating opportunists who might choose to arraign them on trumped-up charges before an alien court whose judges are likely to be ill-disposed towards America too.
In a joint analysis by David Scheffer (who helped set up the ICC) and John Hutson (former US Navy Judge Advocate General), the authors wrote: "If the United States were to join the ICC, one would have to accept at least the theoretical possibility that American citizens (particularly political and military leaders) could be prosecuted before the ICC on charges of committing atrocity crimes."
So, vengeful Democrats could facilitate the indictment of President George W Bush and all his senior commanders in Iraq. American troops on active service have been shown in polls to have little confidence in Barack Obama. His overtures to the ICC will hardly reverse that tendency.
This a bad idea from a man who is suppose to be an expert on the US Constitution and its laws. That what Obama claimed to be when he ran for election. A Constitutional Scholar. Yet when pushed on the actual issues in the Constitution, he cannot remember a single thing about that document.
On January 20, 2009 Barack Hussein Obama took the following oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."Would giving sovereignty of US courts to the ICC not violate that oath? In Obama's eyes the answer is NO. In the eyes of every member of the US Armed Forces the answer would be YES. And to the Supreme Court of the United States? Who knows. That will depend on whether he can stack the Court in his favor.
This is a bad idea, and if this is brought to the Senate as a treaty, it must never be ratified.