(September 28, 2016 at 9:20 pm)InquiringMind Wrote: So apparently 9/11 victims can sue Saudi Arabia for the terrorist attacks now that the US Congress has overridden Obama's veto of the bill that would allow such lawsuits.
My first question is, how would such a lawsuit be enforced? Let's say you did sue Saudi Arabia (in a US court, which is what the bill allows you to do) and you were awarded $3.4 million in damages. Who is going to force Saudi Arabia to pay up? What if they say they're not going to pay? Who is going to enforce that? If they don't pay, are we going to bomb them, at which point they would sue us for wrongful military action?
Secondly, this opens up a Pandora's Box of lawsuits for all kinds of historical grievances. Can we sue Germany for WWII? Can Japan sue us for nuking them on the grounds that the nuke may not have been absolutely necessary? Can countries that experience civilian deaths from errant US drone strikes sue us?
This seems to create a lot of problems. What do you think?
I suppose I will be accused again of country bashing, but
http://science.howstuffworks.com/agent-orange4.htm
"American and Vietnamese plaintiffs have filed numerous lawsuits in U.S. courts seeking compensation for exposure to Agent Orange. To protect itself from claims of wrongdoing, the U.S. government has used the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which dictates that a government can't be sued, even in cases of alleged negligence. "
U.S. government says Fuck you to Vietnamese people.
In their defense, chemical companies usually offer some of the following claims:
- The government ordered them to produce Agent Orange.
- Too much time has passed since its use for people to claim reparations.
- The connection is uncertain between Agent Orange and health problems.
- Vietnamese claims should be settled by the U.S. government.