What Is A War Criminal?

Podcast: Download

Subscribe: RSS | More

Darrell Castle discusses the concept of a war criminal. Who gets to define what a war crime is and once that is established, who determines when someone has committed one of the criminal acts defined as a war crime?

Transcription / Notes

WHAT IS A WAR CRIMINAL?

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. This is Friday the 24^th day of July in the year of our Lord 2026. My beat is still war today, but with the added distinction of talking about what some choose to call war criminals. The question for today then is who gets to decide what a war crime is and who decides if someone has committed one of those crimes he has defined as a war crime.

The International Criminal Court, established by the 1998 Rome Statute and beginning operations in 2002 has been given the right to declare certain people war criminals and to issue indictments against that person which should involve arrest and prosecution. We know from our American system that charges and indictment do not make one guilty, but in the minds of certain people it gives an opportunity for selectively prosecuting those with whom they politically disagree.

This war crimes talk started again when NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani ran for office on a promise to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he ever came to New York. Well, Bibi has announced that he will attend the United Nations meeting in NYC to be held in September. The mayor’s plans, announced in an interview with the New York Times, brought a storm of protests from supporters of Bibi including the President of the United States who declared on social media that the mayor’s plans would not and could not happen.

In response the mayor admitted that he is not the president and is not even congress or the U.S. attorney general so his plans would not be fulfilled. He went on video and said his legal team had exhausted “every avenue available” under the law and concluded “we do not have the independent legal authority” to arrest the head of state of a foreign country who is attending a UN meeting which happens to be located in NYC. Some may have reacted with outrage if the mayor had ordered the NYPD to arrest Netanyahu but since he is now not planning to risk that those people are reacting with outrage anyway and calling him a dishonest politician.

I want to leave the mayor and talk about war crimes in general but I can’t do so until I mention the first lady of the city of New York. Yes, right now, as I record this she is conducting a conference for Muslim women with the stated purpose of informing them that Mary, yes that Mary. The mother of Jesus, who delivered the child on that Christmas was not only not Jewish but was actually a Muslim. What, how can that be. Well, it can’t because of a fact apparently unknown to the first lady of our greatest city. That fact is that when Jesus was born, Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was not born for another 570 years.

Well, be that as it may facts are often lost on people today especially when those facts do not fit a person’s world view.

Back to the International Criminal Court which issued the indictment against Prime Minister Netanyahu and has often referred to him as a war criminal. The ICC has no jurisdiction in the United States which refused to join the 125 nations which signed the agreement. I remember the debates around it quite well and the US representatives were afraid that it would be used to prosecute members of the US military engaged in combat in some politically sensitive spot.

Congress instead did the opposite by passing the American Servicemember’s Protection Act which was designed to shield the US personnel from ICC prosecution. The ICC might be seen as a kind of virtue signaling organization or perhaps it is deeply idealistic and committed to peaceful resolution of conflict. How does it select its targets or how does it decide who is a war criminal and who should be left alone. Do you need to be engaged in actual war to be a war criminal or can you simply commit acts of extreme violence.

My own view is that the term war criminal or war crimes is decided by winners. Would Hitler, his generals and bureaucrats have been criminals if they had won the war. Would some division of the UN have ordered them arrested, no of course not, but instead many of them were hanged and some chose cyanide as the best option. Over in Japan several Japanese officers were hanged as war criminals. One general split his stomach open in 1945 but American doctors saved his life so he could be hanged in 1948.

Back in 1908 there was another tribunal, at that time at the Hague, which decided to define rules for the conduct of armed conflict. That tribunal dealt primarily with humane treatment of prisoners of war and dignified rules for how civilians were to be treated. Keep in mind that in 1908 war planes, poison gas, and machine guns had not been invented. I don’t think those people could have imagined the horror that would rain from the sky onto civilian populations for over the next 100 years.

I have studied the war archives from World War ii as much as I could especially after the internet made them all available to anyone. My conclusion is that the US authorities went out of their way to abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention which was part of the Hague series of international agreements. The Geneva convention defined how prisoners of war were to be treated and most nations knew that if they followed it their enemies were more likely to do so.

So, with a few exceptions, it was the policy of the US to follow it and even NAZI Germany followed it to a large degree. The Japanese however, had other ideas. Their treatment of American prisoners was exceptionally brutal. The percentage of prisoners who died in captivity under the Germans was about 2% but under the Japanese it was more like 60%.

Now, let’s return to Bibi for a moment. Is he or is he not a war criminal. To some extent it’s a matter of opinion and is usually determined by the winners. Right now, I would call him a loser at least in the matter of international politics and especially in the matter of armed conflict. He has no friends and everyone in the UN except the US hates him. His cities and military bases are badly damages by Iranian missiles and drones but does any of that make him a war criminal.

No, but he and his IDF have violated virtually every one of the rules for armed conflict established by the various international conventions I just mentioned. He has repeatedly targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure. In fact, he doesn’t recognize the difference between civilian and military targets. Testimony accuses him of mistreating, even torturing prisoners of war and many have accused IDF soldiers of brutally raping them with objects that destroyed their intestines. Testimony seems to indicate that he intends to destroy an entire people group through warfare and starvation.

I would call those things war crimes, but remember the victors get to determine such things and as long as the US military is solidly behind him it’s hard to say he is defeated. In fact, he and his country most likely would cease to exist without the US. He would be arrested if he set foot out of Israel without the US. That brings up an interesting point and that point is that if Donald Trump is his enabler and before Trump Joe Biden received more money in the form of contributions, donations, bribes, or whatever you choose to call them does that make them war criminals too.

During the Nuremberg trials of NAZI officers, a new charge was invented to cover the massive crimes of which those people were accused. Since the normal criminal code of any of the victorious allied nations was insufficient they invented the crime they called crimes against humanity. Is Bibi guilty of crimes against humanity, is Donald Trump.

The president has vowed to attack civilian infrastructure as a result of Iranian attacks against Hormuz shipping and the deaths of US. Soldiers. When I saw that a 19-year-old woman was killed in a missile attack against her base in Jordan I was very destressed. Many of those men who landed at Omaha Beach were 19 years old but they were not beautiful young women with babies ahead of them. In fact, those men fought for people back home like her. They fought for each other and for their families and their way of life which were threatened by a terrible enemy.

The death of that young woman just lays out the complete moral depravity that has infected this government and the entire globalist system. I pray for her family and that we can find a way to prevent such willful death and destruction.

Finally, folks, we’ve talked about the subjective nature of the term War criminal but sometimes the label may be appropriate. I’m certainly tired of sending teenaged women to fight and die for the benefit of a foreign leader and his vision. This country seems to be looting our tax dollars for people who are not American and might legitimately be called war criminals.

God forgive us if that is true.

At least that’s the way I see it,

Until next time folks,

This is Darrell Castle,

Thanks for listening.