Because they claim to be the good guys.
They are, get over it.
Because they claim to be the good guys.
The Middle East has been like this throughout history.
Most of Europe has enough racist and xenophobic hate to keep the pot boiling, but recognises that racism, apartheid and genocide have no place in a peaceful and civilised society.

Yes, that's why they proscribed the IRGC and Hamas as terror groups.
But, interestingly, not Israel.
Why's that John.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()

What a load of codswallop
What a load of codswallop

It will go nowhere fast. Unless they can get a few together to arrest such as Putin, Kim jong Un and Ayatollah Khamenei in one swoop,I don't think I've ever seen the word 'allegedly' used so many time in one document. It'll be worth breaking open a bag of popcorn if it goes to trial in a few years.
From memory I think April this year is when written submissions are due. Should be a laugh.

I don't think I've ever seen the word 'allegedly' used so many time in one document.
Once in the Netenyahu warrant.
Twice in Gallant's.
And you've never seen that many before? In the case of Netenyahu's warrant that would mean, if you are being truthful, that you've never seen that word used at all, ever, anywhere, in any document whatsoever.
Really?
Frankly I'm amazed you know the meaning of a word you've never seen.
And what word should prosecutors use in warrants, or charge sheets, etc, before a defendant has had a trial, and before a court has decided whether they are guilty of the offences alleged?

What a load of codswallop

Don't be ridiculous, of course I've seen the word before, just not as often as that in one document.

The fact is, you are rather sneakily presenting that document as evidence that Netanyahu, Israel or others are guilty of war crimes.