[dekrg]

It will be pretty amusing to watch all those westerners who, not so long ago, were talking about "rules based order" pretend nothing is happening or to justify it.

[ncallaway]

As a westerner, who believes in the rules based order, I would give anything for our leadership which is launching this illegal war to be sent to the Hague.

Our leadership are war criminals, and should be treated as such.

Some, specifically, are war criminals who have committed crimes that carry the death penalty, and should be arrested, tried, and (if found guilty) executed.

[JumpCrisscross]

> I would give anything for our leadership which is launching this illegal war to be sent to the Hague

Simpler: send them to prison at home. There is no world in which the Hague can enforce its law in America without the U.S. government's consent. At that point, skip the extra step and make war crimes actually illegal.

[coffinbirth]

It sadly never happened for the perpetrators of the Iraq/Ukraine/Libya/Afghan/Syria/Yugoslav/... wars. Remember Collateral Murder? And that was just the tip of the iceberg. Also, no one really cared about all the veterans back home, many of whom suffered and still suffer from PTSD. The U.S. truly is the biggest sh*thole on earth.

[pqtyw]

To be fair that applies to Maduro to if you count crimes against humanity in general. Certainly applied to Sadam.

So now the question is how to do you capture this leadership without foreign intervention while they are still in power?

Talk is nice... but there is no real mechanism to impose what you are proposing besides this.

[stinkbeetle]

Presumably also the ones who invaded Iraq and occupied Afghanistan, carried out extrajudicial executions, droned weddings, deposed Libya's leader and laid ruin to the country, trafficked arms and money to cartels in South America and ISIS / "JV team" terrorist groups to destroy the Levant Or was that "rules based order"?

I think you've been had with the whole "rules based order thing". You can keep winding the clock back and it's the same thing. Iraq 1, Iran, Vietnam, Korea, Somalia. When exactly would you say this alleged "rules based order" was great?

[drunx]

I think the notion of the comment about westerners is to highlight that as a common person you can believe in rules based order, or you are made to believe in that and live your life by that, however the leaders don't really care about it all that much. They are happy the masses are "ruled" and controlled, but as for their decisions - rules don't always apply.

And in many cases western societies tend to express the idea that inn other, dictatorship countries, people sort of "let the dictators dictate", while "westerners" not.

But I think this current case (and Trump's presidency at large) is an example of how little we can decide or influence. Even in the supposed "democracy".

I wish to believe that voting matters, but Trump showed that you can make people vote for anything if you put massive upfront effort into managing information/missinformation and controlling the minds through populism, etc. Then voting becomes... Powerless. As it has no objective judgement.

And despite possible disagreements some might voice - revolutions don't happen anymore. People can't anymore fight the leaders as leaders hold a monopoly on violence through making sure the army is with them.

Well... We as people lost and losing the means to "control" our leaders. Westerners, easterners - doesn't matter.

[breppp]

you assume war crimes, but which war crimes?

In general international law is much more lenient than people are willing to believe. e.g. it's legal to kill civilians if you are attacking a military target which is important enough

[skissane]

This is a bit confused-if you send them to the Hague, they can’t be executed-because neither the ICC nor any ad hoc tribunals located in that city have the death penalty. As an abolitionist state, I doubt the Dutch government would ever consent to a capital trial taking place on their territory.

[DrBazza]

On the other hand, in an alternate reality, this could be preventing a North Korea style dictatorship. Or to flip it, had the USA stayed in South Korea and carried on fighting, it might have prevented North Korea and the Kims and saved literally millions of deaths of North Koreans at the hands of their own government.

What do the Venezuelans actually think about this, given that Maduro rigged the last election in 2024 and denied them their democratic choice?

[DrBazza]

Well, 'western' 'rules based order' involves democratic elections and being in 166th place for government transparency isn't a good sign. Appointing your successor isn't exactly democratic, in fact it's very much the sign of most countries that end in dictatorship:

"Chavez was elected to a third term in October 2012. However, he was never sworn in due to medical complications; he died in March 2013.[95] Nicolás Maduro was picked by Chavez as his successor, appointing him vice president in 2013."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela#Bolivarian_governmen...

[TheAlchemist]

Some certainly will, but not many I think. There are very few westerners outside of the US, who want to have anything to do with what the US are doing now.

[JumpCrisscross]

> all those westerners who, not so long ago, were talking about "rules based order" pretend nothing is happening or to justify it

MAGA is a rejection of the international rules-based order. Trump joins Putin and Xi in explicitly rejecting it. To the extent anyone in America is calling for a return to that order, they're doing it while criticising Trump.

[wood_spirit]

The UK, for example, stopped intelligence sharing in the Caribbean so as to not be party to war crimes.

[sapphicsnail]

They have the same respect for domestic laws as they do for international ones

[ReflectedImage]

MAGA at its core is a rejection of the lower classes having wealth.

[tdeck]

If the last 2 years of Gaza genocide didn't do that, I'm n not sure why this would. They'll spend the first 20 minutes talking about how bad Maduro is and the next 5 minutes saying this is "misguided" and didn't go through the proper channels.

[coffeebeqn]

Rules based order has always only applied to small and medium countries. The UN Security Council does whatever the hell they want

[potsandpans]

It's unreal.

[realusername]

I don't think Trump ever cared about rules based order.

[immibis]

His defenders kept, and keep, using it as an excuse.

[tguvot]

Going back 7 months: Germany’s Merz says Israel is doing the ‘dirty work for all of us’ by countering Iran

In this case probably attitude is probably similar

[8note]

matched by the hegsdeth signal chat that the US bombed the houthis on europe's behalf

[jennyholzer3]

"rules based order" means putting people with dark skin in handcuffs on TV

[adwn]

No idea what you're going on about. Those in the West who stand for a rules-based international order certainly didn't ask for this war, and Trump, who did start this war, never gave a shit about rules or norms, international or otherwise.

[nutjob2]

Trump hardly is a representative for "westerners", actually the majority of them think he's a lawless looney. No one outside of his administration or party is justifying his actions.

Your comment is just bigotry.

[basisword]

Rapist presidents have no authority to defend 'rules based order'. Were you also ok with him defending 'rules based order' by arming Israel as they committed genocide? Or when he committed war crimes by blowing up the boats over the last few months?