Cuba vs Trump

[crazy canuck]

So an order is made by a still functioning part of the American Legal system.  That order gets stayed pending appeal to the US Supreme Court. And then the US Supreme Court grants the appeal with much hand waving. I don't see a lot of nations wanting to waste the expense of going through that charade.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

I could see it happen under some future administration, sure, assuming an investigation obtained sufficient evidence.

I don't see that happening ever.  If the Trump regime is going to face legal consequences for what they have done, it's going to be in the US legal system.  Even the most internationalist Democrats have had a "good for thee but not for me" attitude towards the ICC and similar institutions.  I think it would take the US losing a war on the level of Germany in World War II for a senior American official to face an international tribunal.

[The Minsky Moment]

No country ever did submit an extradition request for Kissinger.

[Jacob]

It would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

It would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.

Have them fall out of windows or choke on veggies. Works well enough.

[Syt]

It would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.

And I'm sure there's a lot of bad actors around the world who are perking up to see if this becomes normalized now.

[crazy canuck]

No country ever did submit an extradition request for Kissinger.

And?  The Americans do not and have never recognized the jurisdiction of the ICC. And the likelihood of an American court ever ordering the extradition of an American because of alleged war crimes or crimes against humanity is zero.  So I ask again, why would any nation waste time and expense going through the motions when the result is inevitable?

[Josephus]

I could see it happen under some future administration, sure, assuming an investigation obtained sufficient evidence.

I don't see that happening ever.  If the Trump regime is going to face legal consequences for what they have done, it's going to be in the US legal system.  Even the most internationalist Democrats have had a "good for thee but not for me" attitude towards the ICC and similar institutions.  I think it would take the US losing a war on the level of Germany in World War II for a senior American official to face an international tribunal.

Yeah, hardly anybody gets punished for war crimes, or crimes against humanity.
If anything ever happens to those currently serving in Trump's administration, it's got to happen in some future times, to charges brought by the US Justice Dept. I hope someday it happens, but I'm not so hopeful.

Like even his kids. Say what you want about Biden's son, but these guys are profiting quite handsomely from their Dad's administration. Will they ever get charged with corruption? We can only hope.

[The Minsky Moment]

I think we are making a lot of unwarranted assumptions about the future. In 2014, no one would have thought that America would be doing the things it has been doing in 2025.  Trump has unmoored traditional assumptions and restraints and that can lead into many different directions.  The US extraditing its own war criminals to get around a dubious pardon is within the Overton Window at this point, is as a full descent into fascism and many other possible outcomes.

[Valmy]

Brutal crime against humanity. We have done far more destruction to Cuba's people than every excess of their governments going back to independence.

Just depressing.

[The Minsky Moment]

Hegseth already has a long charge sheet and he's barely served a year.

His fingerprints are all over the Iranian school bombing which appears to be at least gross negligence or reckless indifference, given the full circumstances that are known and his own statements about eschewing "stupid rules of engagement" for maximum lethality.

There were also the murders of the individuals on boats in the Caribbean, which appear to have been directed under his orders and authorization.  Deliberate violations of both domestic and international law resulting in the deaths of multiple people.

In the broader context of his openly expressed contempt of international law or indeed any legal or moral restraint on violence committed under the purported color of American military action, I believe a strong case could be made already and he is still busy adding to the outrages.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

The US extraditing its own war criminals to get around a dubious pardon is within the Overton Window at this point, is as a full descent into fascism and many other possible outcomes.

I think it's in the Overton Window, but only because I think a major international or civil war is within it as well.  I think one of those is necessary for extradition to happen.  I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think the signs are encouraging.

Brutal crime against humanity. We have done far more destruction to Cuba's people than every excess of their governments going back to independence.

Just depressing.

It is, depressing and unnecessary.  However, tying back into my other point, this was also the long-time argument against the crippling sanctions imposed on Iraq between 1991 and 2003.

This is another reason I don't think any extradition request would be fulfilled without some sort of serious external impetus: too many still don't see actions like cutting of Cuba from oil as a crime (even if they disagree with it as a measure).  We've had decades of other people protesting all the "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" the US as allegedly committed.  Our governments have punished (or attempted to punish) those that we agree are actually crimes, but there are many where our governments, and a significant number of our people, don't think the alleged actions constitute crimes.  That's why there has been universal disdain for the idea of the ICC making judgement on Americans.  Perhaps the Trump regime will drive a change whereby we start doing it for the clear cases where we agree with the ICC, but as I mentioned above I'm not encouraged.

[crazy canuck]

I think we are making a lot of unwarranted assumptions about the future. In 2014, no one would have thought that America would be doing the things it has been doing in 2025.  Trump has unmoored traditional assumptions and restraints and that can lead into many different directions.  The US extraditing its own war criminals to get around a dubious pardon is within the Overton Window at this point, is as a full descent into fascism and many other possible outcomes.

No, those are not assumptions that need to be made in order to arrive at the conclusion that the United States will never extradite a US citizen to another country to face charges of committing atrocities against humanity or other war crimes.

All that we need to assume is that the United States will continue doing what it has always done.

On the other hand, your claim requires a great number of assumptions that are dubious.  The biggest one is that for some reason the United States will change its historical approach.  But assume that kind of significant change occurs. There is still a problem of finding a court that will extradite, and even if a lower court does order extradition that order needs to survive an appeal to the United States Supreme Court.  You know the one that has already ruled that a president can commit no criminal offences well in office?

Your hope that the United States is going to return to some form of normality with strong liberal democratic institutions seems overly optimistic in the near future.

[Valmy]

It is, depressing and unnecessary.  However, tying back into my other point, this was also the long-time argument against the crippling sanctions imposed on Iraq between 1991 and 2003.

Those sanctions? More justified than these.

We eased the sanctions and things were getting better in the 2010s. Cuba was starting to open. Then we clamped down...for no reason. Cuba had done nothing at all to justify this. This is just pure imperialism.

The minute the Soviet Union stopped existing all rational reason for sanctions disappeared.

[The Minsky Moment]

All that we need to assume is that the United States will continue doing what it has always done.

If we made that assumption in 2014, we'd never be where we are today.

Your hope that the United States is going to return to some form of normality with strong liberal democratic institutions seems overly optimistic in the near future.

????

I'm not expressing any hope at all.  I'm simply observing that Trump has pushed the Overton Window sufficiently to open the door to all sorts of possibilities, from a Qanon nationalist-fascist dictatorship, to left wing show trials of Trumpian officials, to everything in between.

It seems that you are making the same mistake that some MAGA boosters, including Alito and Thomas are making, that the precedent shattering that Trump is accomplishing, and the immunity rulings of the Court, can only be exploited by him, and not repurposed by others.  There are substantial numbers of people in America today that are OK with the idea that murdering insurance company executives is a viable, perhaps optimal route for health care reform.  There is no telling how things may develop.