People are starving and the world has never been closer to World War 3 and they just can’t stand the weed. Lol. What the fuck. I’m glad they lost the fight though, cat is out of the bag now and never going back in once all the old timers die off its over with.
UN can’t do shit about Israel’s ethnic cleansing operation and it has the audacity to talk about something so irrelevant. Does the UN even do anything these days?
Dude you sound ignorant - UN is made up of it’s member countries that discuss what should be in those treaties. It’s not a person or a team of people just deciding randomly what the treaties should contain, and Germany has approved and signed on to the treaty.
And why the UN doesn’t do shit, is because it’s controlled by it’s member countries, and certain countries has veto-power over Usn decision. And it’s rather the world doesn’t do shit, than the UN doesn’t do shit.
That is basically it, and now learn to breath through your nose.
The UN should be looking out for people’s safety instead of reaffirming bullshit. People will smoke, so they should have access to clean shit for regulated farmers and vendors.
Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t the United States invade Iraq despite the objections of the UN Security Council? That happened, right? Without reprocutions?
If that’s the case, I’m wondering who cares about the UN objecting to laws a country passes, within their own borders, that are not human rights violations. What are they going to do? Write a stern letter?
Same as extradition and breaking laws of another country even though it doesn’t break any laws they are in.
And yet the International Criminal Court is fine, right? Despite it only going after POC from ex-European colonies.
This whole idea that you can commit any crime you want: if it crosses borders, if it is a crime against humanity, if it occurred in a country that it happened in is a failed state and could never prosecute the person, or if it happened at sea doesn’t work and never will work. Governments have a right to go after people outside their borders in specific situations and without that right the world is full of pirates, genocidal warlords, international cartels, Russian paid shills, etc.
Don’t like it? Don’t commit genocide and you are highly highly unlikely to have an issue.
Yet American can kill citizens of Western countries in those countries and they get protected by America. If anyone trys to put them on trial then America can do anything to stop that happening including war.
But when someone does something legal in their own country as small as piracy or journalism. America wants them extradited.
You’re on about genocide and you pulled it out of your arse. Honestly you need to explain what point that is and how that relates to America having one rule for them and one rule for others. You’re not really talking any sense.
I have no idea who that is. I was thinking more Julian Assange.
So by your logic, was the U.S in the right to extradite Julian Assange on espionage charges in spite of him being an Australian citizen living in his own country?
If so, what about Benjamin Netanyahu? Would the US try to extradite him from Israel if he gets indicted for his genocide in the US?
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (perjorative, perjorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (perjorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
So like, meth heads? I’ve never heard someone in meth say it wasn’t addictive. So you think that someone shooting up meth is better than someone that smokes weed? Even the vast majority of stoners that didn’t talk about it almost at all?
Dude, I’m totally clueless here. But hey, if daily smoke sessions are the secret sauce to soothing your jitters, then you’re clearly the genius in the room!
Add comment