But Repug Presidents have???????? Name one!

@AnneWimsey

Republicans and retrumplicans do not recognize any laws. Being legends in their own minds, they are above the Law.

@AnneWimsey

Check this out
[hrw.org]

And we had Obama with a majority in Congress for his first 2 years and the US failed to ratify ANY human rights treaties. And Treaties are what international law are based on

Excerpt from Human Rights watch Website below

With a new administration and Congress, the United States has an important opportunity to reposition itself as a global leader on human rights. One means towards that goal is to sign and ratify core human rights treaties. Chief among these are international conventions relating to children, women, persons with disabilities, torture, enforced disappearance, and the use of anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions.

The US has not ratified any international human rights treaties since December 2002, when it ratified two optional protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Since that time, important new treaties have been adopted and other long-standing treaties have gained new member states. Unfortunately, the US has too often remained outside these efforts. For example, the US is the only country other than Somalia that has not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the most widely and rapidly ratified human rights treaty in history. It is one of only seven countries-together with Iran, Nauru, Palau, Somalia, Sudan and Tonga- that has failed to ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

These and other key treaties that the US has yet to ratify protect some of the world's most vulnerable populations. They would help, for instance, a woman seeking protection by the police from a threatening spouse; a mentally ill prisoner placed in solitary confinement; and a child who has been trafficked into prostitution. The treaties espouse non-discrimination, due process, and other core values that most American unquestionably support. They are also largely consistent with existing US law and practice.

The failure of the US to join with other nations in taking on international human rights legal obligations has undercut its international leadership on key issues, limiting its influence, its stature, and its credibility in promoting respect for human rights

@t1nick Obama sent more drones to kill people that included collateral damage (That's the killing of civilians by the way) than any other president in US history. And My country Ireland has signed all the international treaties on Human rights that the US will not sign, including treaties that Obama had the opportunity to sign. When the US signs these treaties and shows respect for human rights and the international law enforcement that comes from these treaties, then the rest of the world may have a lot more respect for the US when it comes to human rights and a respect for international law. If Obama signed some of these treaties then maybe there would be some justice to be gained despite the Blackwater pardons Trump just made.

@AnneWimsey
"But Repug Presidents have???????? Name one!"
Is that what you base your bar on. Then you bar is not very High

If you can't condemn a democrat President for not respecting International law and you think this is ok because they were no worse then Republican Presidents...then America is lost

@dermot235

Point well taken, but they are separate issues. Conflating of the two on the outside seems sensible. but in reality they are quite different circumstances. But I get your point.

By the by, I have always criticized my country for their failure to sign the Treaties on Human Rights

@t1nick Good for you. We need more Americans to do the same. Democrats have to put pressure on their party from the bottom up to get this done.

And I don't think they are separate issues. If the US had sign up to the international courts that prosecute war crimes then the Black water atrocities could have been prosecuted in an international court and not in the US. Then a Trump pardon would have not been possible

@dermot235

Once again, good point. Cannot argue with your logic.

@dermot235 do you willfully misunderstand? Or have No sense of humor whatsoever? Or Both? "Sarcasm", sweetie, Google it

@dermot235

Yeah I know. I do not understand why his Adminstation didn't ratify any. Only thing I can think of is that with the Great Recession looming, his attention went to that thinking he would get back to it, but never got the chance?????????

@t1nick The great recession hit every other country in the world including large complex economies such as Germany, France, Britain, Italy, Spain etc etc, but they all found the time to sign these treaties.

The Us could not find the time to address the issues surrounding Cluster Munitions that have been used by the US since the 1960's in Vietnam. The US has used more Cluster Munitions than any other country on the Planet. 60 years later nothing has been done. Kennedy, LBJ, Carter, Clinton and Obama, all Democrats have blood on their hand for this one. 100's of thousands of civilians have been killed by Cluster Munitions. Obama did limit the export of Cluster Munitions but had a stockpile of cluster munitions itself. The biggest Stockpile in the world. Shame on the US for this one.

The 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions was drafted in 2007-2008 following the international outcry over civilian casualties from the use of cluster munitions primarily by Israel in Lebanon (2006), which followed the growing concern over the weapon's use in Iraq (2003), Afghanistan (2002), Kosovo and Serbia (1999) and earlier US use during the Vietnam War (1960s-70s).

Cluster munitions or cluster bombs are either air-dropped or ground-launched weapons that typically explode in the air and send dozens, even hundreds, of tiny bomblets over an area the size of a football field. Cluster munitions pose principal dangers to civilians. Because the weapon cannot distinguish between military targets and civilians, it invariably kills and wounds civilians when used in or near populated areas. They can also harm civilians decades after the conflict is over, as unexploded "duds" on the ground act like landmines, exploding when touched by unwitting civilians. Because of the nature of these duds, they are highly likely to cause death, making them even more dangerous than ordinary landmines. In fact, cluster bombs are estimated to have caused more civilian casualties in Iraq in 2003 and Kosovo in 1999 than any other weapons system.

The Convention on Cluster Munitions was negotiated in May 2008 and opened for signature in December 2008. It provides a robust framework for tackling cluster munitions. It prohibits the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions and requires clearance of affected areas within 10 years, destruction of stockpiled cluster munitions within eight years, and assistance to victims of the weapon. As of March 2009, a total of 96 states have signed the Convention including most members of NATO (including UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Belgium, Canada), and other close US allies (Australia, Indonesia, Philippines, Japan). A total of 30 ratifications are required to trigger entry into force of the Convention.

The United States did not participate in the "Oslo Process" negotiations leading up to the treaty. The United States has been the world's leading known user of cluster munitions and is known to have exported or transferred the weapon to at least 28 other countries, and maintains a stockpile of more than 700 million cluster submunitions.