• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    If you disagree with my assessment, then perhaps you could provide an example of a US official being held accountable for the atrocities US commits.

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      But we’re discussing your disagreement with my assessment that “charge” is willfully dishonest.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        There’s no disagreement, it’s obvious that your assessment is sophistry meant to distract from the actual point being made. Nobody is falling for it.

        • Melllvar
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          What’s obvious is that my assessment is probably correct. The lawsuit will fail because the “actual point being made” is not a legal point but a political one. And certainly not a criminal point.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            ICJ just ruled that there is a probable case for genocide in Gaza, and there is clear evidence that US has been aiding and abetting this genocide since the start. US has vetoed multiple ceasefire resolution at the UN, and has provided Israel with the material aid to carry out the genocide. The only reason nobody in US will be held accountable for these atrocities is because US regime sees itself as being above international law. This is why a civil case is because there is no path to any actual justice.

            • Melllvar
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              But “charged”? Come on. That’s clearly trying to obfuscate that it’s a private lawsuit.

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                The article is pretty clear about the nature of the lawsuit. Using the word charged here is entirely reasonable. It’s amazing that you spent so much energy debating an entirely irrelevant point while ignoring the actual context of Joe Biden aiding and abetting a genocide, or the fact that there is no path towards holding him accountable. That seems like the part that’s actually worth discussing.

                • Melllvar
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  It’s amazing that you spent so much energy debating an entirely irrelevant point

                  Can you believe I even read the lawsuit?! Crazy, I know!