![]() |
Vinod's Blog Random musings from a libertarian, tech geek... |
|
(via Den Beste) This article gives you an idea of what a idiotic, peace of crap transnational bodies like the ICC can become. The curiously named Opheera McDoom, writing for Reuters, reports:
I actually do sorta buy into the noble cause of the ICC but the legitimacy of an institution can't merely rest on the nobility of its calling. And the ICC is a great example of a prima facie good idea hi-jacked by the Western-loathing, PoMo, utopian, pseudo-intellectuals. The type that tend to frequent bodies like the UN, EU, and more than a few of the world's NGOs. In the real world, rubber does hit the road and hard tradeoffs have to be made. And what constitutes the potential war crime for which Tony Blair may be personally held accountable?
Guess what, I'll come forward and eliminate any doubt in the Phil Shiner's mind: *THERE WILL BE CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN AN IRAQI INTERVENTION*. The only rhetorical offer I can give is "compared to what?" Does Phil Shiner even begin to compare *potential* Iraqi civilian deaths from bombing vs. the number that Saddam has directly killed over the past 15 years? Or the number Saddam would try/threaten to kill if he managed to get his hands on WMD? Does Phil even begin to consider whether he should pursue Saddam with the full weight of the ICC? Or how someone like Saddam even could be brought before his self-righteous tribunal? Unfortunately for us, daily geopolitical life presents idiotarians like Mr. Shiner with hundreds of situations where the cost of an action, albeit small, can be quantified while the benefits -- much larger -- can not. And that's all this idiot needs to call in the hounds. ![]() |
|
| ||