# Use of force against the ICC?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/use-of-force-against-the-icc/117108>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [July 2, 2002, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/use-of-force-against-the-icc/117108 "2002-07-02T22:05:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Saen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d2c977/32.png) [@Saen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saen)\
**Post date:** [July 6, 2002, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/use-of-force-against-the-icc/117108/21 "2002-07-06T23:26:42Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by sailor \*  
> \*\*Well, China is also in the same camp with the US this time. They both claim national sovereignty to do whatever the hell they please. \*\*

Seems they are claiming soverignty to _not_ do what others please. Significant difference.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\
**Post date:** [July 7, 2002, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/use-of-force-against-the-icc/117108/22 "2002-07-07T18:33:09Z")

</div>

The bit I liked in the article liked to in the OP was where “Representative Tom DeLay, the Texas Republican” called (it) a “rump court” and a “rogue court.”. Excellent. Got to love the “rogue” implication.

So, a treaty signed by 139 nations and ratified by 66, including most democratic nations supports “a rogue court”. Given the rather integral importance of the Rule of Law in democratic nations, one assumes it can’t be long before the Republican member from Texas expands his ideas to characterise all other democracies as rogue States. Whatever that means.

There’s ‘Isolationism’ and there’s Isolationism Texas style.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/use-of-force-against-the-icc/117108.md?page=1)