Britain is leading the charge against basic human rights

[Valmy]

So it seems it's the Independent that has jumped the shark, not Amnesty International.

If you say so.  Calling for UN interventions in these three circumstances seems pretty shark-jumping.  If they mean more interventions in general well...even that is precarious.

However the Independent is most certainly shit judging by the headline.  No argument there.

[Admiral Yi]

Does it?

It am!

Much more reasonable than the wacko stuff in the Independent article.

[Jacob]

Much more reasonable. 

However, who gets to decide if a certain situation involves genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity? 

Yeah, there's a certain amount of political sausage making inherent in that process that perhaps is not completely addressed by Amnesty International's somewhat idealistic approach.

I expect their answer is along the lines of the European Convention of Human Right and the European Court of Human Rights, which I expect is one of the reasons they're down on Cameron for wanting to withdraw from those.

And that, I suspect, is the reason for the Independent's hatchet job (well, that and the click-bait).

[Admiral Yi]

I expect their answer is along the lines of the European Convention of Human Right and the European Court of Human Rights, which I expect is one of the reasons they're down on Cameron for wanting to withdraw from those.

They could probably come up with a ruling in 3-5 years, if the matter were particularly pressing.

[Jacob]

If you say so.  Calling for UN interventions in these three circumstances seems pretty shark-jumping.  If they mean more interventions in general well...even that is precarious.

I'll give you that it's somewhat idealistic to hope and call for that the UN live up to its lofty ideals of protecting and promoting human rights and intervening to prevent atrocities and genocide.

I don't rate that as shark jumping, though. Amnesty International's entire purpose is to call for groups, governments, and organizations to live up to the lofty ideals they claim to have regarding human rights et. al., and to call them out where they fall short.

[Jacob]

I expect their answer is along the lines of the European Convention of Human Right and the European Court of Human Rights, which I expect is one of the reasons they're down on Cameron for wanting to withdraw from those.

They could probably come up with a ruling in 3-5 years, if the matter were particularly pressing.

Oh you cynic you 

[Malthus]

Once again, well-wishers appear to wish that the UN acted like a real international sovereign ... at least to prevent atrocities. Sounds great in theory.

No-one ever seems to consider that the use of power ain't that simple, that it is effectively impossible to make the UN truly sovereign over situations involving atrocities but not otherwise, that pretty well any situation involving conflict these days has well-wishers finding atrocties committed by all sides (even reasonable people disagree over what consitutes an "atrocity", and the UN ain't even made up of reasonable people, but of diplomats), and that any system that depends on its members essentially volunteering ther services cannot act as a sovereign in the first place.

It is pretty obvious who, if the UN veto was ever lifted in situations involving "war crimes", would be among the first on the chopping block - that would be Israel, the world champion war crimes committer ... if one goes by the UN. 

[Admiral Yi]

Oh you cynic you 

Hardly.  Those institutions being the way they are, they would undoubtedly include appeal mechanisms, requirements of evidence, etc., etc.

[Sheilbh]

Our politics is unbelievably stupid on the subject of human rights

[Ed Anger]

Slightly off topic:

You know what is grinding my gears? Hate speech laws.

You may go back to your amnesty thingy.

[Valmy]

Our politics is unbelievably stupid on the subject of human rights

Is your government still video recording everybody?

[Eddie Teach]

However, who gets to decide if a certain situation involves genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity? 

The UN Security Council.

[Sheilbh]

Is your government still video recording everybody?

That's not what I meant

I'll never understand the objections to CCTV.

[Valmy]

Is your government still video recording everybody?

That's not what I meant

I'll never understand the objections to CCTV.

Huh.  And you don't mind the NSA stuff either

If you have a problem with human rights abuses it must really be serious.

[Admiral Yi]

I'll never understand the objections to CCTV.

Most people have an expectation of not being seen when they walk out in public.