Remove Diplomatic Immunity, OR Use International Law properly

It was somewhat of an outrage when Muammar Gaddafi was murdered by the rebels in a fairly horrific scene, when in reality he should have stood trial in a court of International Law. This is the kind of barbarity that should not happen anymore. He was captured, and would have had no difficulty being put on trial. He also now has the ability to become a martyr, and that could have some very dangerous repercussions.

The idea of removing diplomatic immunity is more difficult, and admittedly a bit more ill-advised, but my point is that a lot of the world's leaders need to stand trial for the clear violations of their country's constitution, and international law. The unconstitutional wars in the US for example that have been happening since the 50s, and the endless Western foreign manipulation into other country's leadership.

Thoughts?

Vote
96%
4%
Rating
Votes
32
Views
3369
Mark as inappropriate

15 Comments

  • Anonymous

    7 years ago
    Absolutely.

    0 0

  • Agree but its going to be hard for people not to crack under those horrific conditions.

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    7 years ago
    Also agree, but the thought that the world could police things in such a chaotic situation is almost on par with the US thinking it could overthrow a dictator and install democracy overnight...I see this as a problem, but far from a suggestion of a solution.

    0 0

  • I am not disagreeing with your heart felt words but with the idea that any form of law can be addressed in a rebellion uprising. I really think it becomes problematic for the world to police an uprising and rebellion without sending in the UN and even then its one hell of a problem. Gaddafi could only have diplomatic immunity outside of his country and what happened there means that should not be under review. You can only cull such problem happening if UN forces are policing what is going on. The world wanted to rid Gaddafi's regime, the job of UN peace keepers is to go to try to keep the peace and prevent a war. I there for can not see how the POW could advise world governments on this issue. What could we whisper into his ear?

    0 0

  • Please realize the POW is not a dictator nor a leader but our voice and that's an advisory shout. That was stated in the youtube video.

    0 0

  • I really do beg to differ about Muammar Gaddafi, on 5 points.
    1. Under Gaddafi the people of Libya was placed first in terms of Human Rights.
    2. Local Government has more power than state government.
    3. Education, electricity and basic Humanitarian supplies are free in Lybia.
    4. Lybia is one of the few countries in the world that was debt free.
    5. Though a dictatorship, the Lybian people were likely to be more democratic than most democracy.
    I understand about the killings of opposition, and I do not support it at all. However all Gaddafi wanted was the people to be benefited. Yes I do believe that Gaddafi should answer to his crimes but I do not believe people should condemn him just because he is a dictator and the education we have about dictatorship as Satan's right hand man. We need to look at things more deeply and get rid of exaggerated media like Fox.

    0 0

  • Diplomatic immunity is a serious issue, but if it pertains to Gadaffi, I don't yet see how you made that point. By the way, I hold no grudge against those who enacted their vengeance on a man who killed thousands of their family members and countrymen and who ordered brigades to find and rape wives and daughters of resistance members. And I didn't hear this from FOX. I heard it from an interview in Tripoli with said rapists on BBC radio.

    0 0

  • Mr Gene Sharp is the progenitor of the current nonviolent revolutions seen in Kosovo, Berlin, Arab Spring, and the "Occupy" movement. He would agree with your proposition. Let's work on this!

    0 0

  • None of this is "legal", the occupations, the wars, the "campaigns" done for "humaitarianism"(Lies- oil and power simply stated)

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    6 years ago
    thats that sht i dont likeeee

    0 0

  • I agree with the initial subject but I don't agree with international law because international laws are created by a republic monarch what we call the United Nations not by the people that it would affect.

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    5 years ago
    An anwser from an expert! Thanks for contributing.

    0 0

  • Anonymous

    5 years ago
    Good point. I hadn't thguhot about it quite that way. :)

    0 0

Similar Ideas:

Instantly search any time by typing

Sorry, we couldn't find
"".