Whatever time, we will work it out later. I say to my colleague, we have status of force agreements around the world. I am sure my colleague is aware, who served on the Armed Services Committee, that we have status of force agreements. There are U.S. servicemen all the time who are tried in local courts in other countries. We are not breaking ground here. We have known about those cases. We read about them, tragically, when they occur. We have those agreements whenever we place troops in various places--Japan being the most recent example. I don't mind your argument. But to suggest somehow that men and women in uniform are never subjected to any jurisdiction of a foreign land where the courts and the laws may be substantially different than what we have is not the law of the land is absurd. I am not interested in seeing laws adopted here that subject our men and women in uniform to foreign laws, but we do that already, it seems to me.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of status of force agreements for U.S. servicemen in foreign jurisdictions.
Share
More from Chris Dodd
Well, they're going to have quite a stage now, with the World Cup and the Olympics coming up in the next few years.
There has been a very constructive and positive role that Brazil has played regionally as well, and very exciting.
But, whether such a temptation is motivated by a noble desire to speed up the legislative process or by pure political expedience, I believe such changes would be unwise. To my fellow Senators who have never served a day in the minority, I…
I rise today to speak in support of the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, a bipartisan measure that will guarantee our Nation's law enforcement officers, firefighters and emergency medical personnel the right to bargain…





