Could Bush be tried as a war criminal?

[Renew Deal]

I have an opinion on this that I will put in a seperate post. I have been thinking about the war criminals that are in court now (Milosevic + Saddam) and was wondering. What do you think?

Disclaimer: I am sure this will piss off the right wing extremists (freepers, ldotters, many others) but I don't give a shit. Bush belongs in a prison cell for the Plame stuff, so one way or another, he's a criminal.

[Renew Deal]

1. I think....

he can. Didn't he sign off on the torture memo's? Isn't that enough? Also, isn't holding kids against the law?

[commander bunnypants]

2. Not in Merika

but I know a lot of Arabs that would love to get their hands on him

DDQM

[Renew Deal]

3. I mean at the Hague.

[Dangerman]

4. Two words for you...

Hell, Yeah!

[tritsofme]

5. He probably could

but it will never happen.

[ms.smiler]

7. He was tried and found guilty of war crimes.

Given the guilty finding of the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan, could our Generals take possession of our "Commander in Chief" and turn him over to the Hague? Is their finding legal grounds for arrest? Is this why attorneys in Ireland wanted him arrested by their government?

[Blue Wally]

14. Do we want.........

to set a precedent for our generals deposing the president?? I don't think we would want to go down that road.

[ms.smiler]

15. We do not presently have an elected President.

If Bush were elected, and was not a convicted war criminal, I would not like or support the idea of our military taking action against him. Given that we did not elect him, and he is now a convicted war criminal, the Republicans won't support Impeachment, so what should we do with him? The Direction in the Verdict was:

18. Direction:

1. The Defendant is a convicted war criminal consequently unfit to hold public office; citizens, soldiers and all civil personnel of the United States would be constitutionally and otherwise, justified in withdrawing all co-operation from the Defendant and his government; and in declining to obey illegal orders of the Defendant and his administration; including military orders threatening other nations or the people of the United States on the basis of the Nuremberg Principle, that illegal orders of Superior must not be obeyed.

[jayavarman]

20. uh, I don't think he is "a convicted war criminal"

yet . . . .

[ms.smiler]

21. He was convicted March 13, 2004

Included in the Verdict was:

Guilty of waging a war of aggression under International Criminal Law, Crimes Against Humanity, and Omnicide. Now how do we use their Verdict to rid us of this menace?

[jayavarman]

22. Convicted by what court? Hague?

This is the 1st I've heard of it

[ms.smiler]

23. The International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan at Tokyo

I should just save everything I read because I would like to better understand their relationship to the U.N. Ramsey Clark worked on this and the Tribunal documented the war crimes committed in Afghanistan. They cover the Caryle Group, Unocal, Osama bin Laden, depleted uranium and other illegal weapons, the PNAC, etc... I hope this is clickable.

http://www.traprockpeace.org/tokyo_trial_13march04.pdf

[tritsofme]

18. If we're having a serious discussion about this

there would have to be a change in federal law for us even to cooperate with the ICC in any way.

[teamster633]

8. I answered yes on the [i]could[/i]...

...but it's certainly unlikely. Now if the question was should there really isn't much question. But that would have to wait until the trial for treason and other high crimes had been resolved.

[BillZBubb]

6. In a perfect world, Bush* would stand before an international court

for crimes against humanity and waging aggressive war.

This isn't a perfect world, so it'll never happen.

[Fitzovich]

9. I would love to see it

But, I suspect it would never happen.

[Pallas180]

10. I certainly hope so.

.

[aden_nak]

11. Geneva Strikes Again

He most certainly can. In fact, it would be possible to argue that he is guilty of war crimes even if he didn't give the order directly, because it was his lack of control over his own armed forces that allowed said crimes to take place. Just as he is responsible for the actions of his military, he is ultimately responsible for the crimes of his military.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. Perhaps Blair Will Pardon Him

I mean at the Hague.<<

Where else? I would pay to go.... spend all my retirement money... a buck three eighty...... and get the best seat in the house....

[dubyaD40web]

12. He can, but he won't, unfortunately.

Aside from the torture of prisoners, the simple fact is that he attacked a nation that posed no threat and had caused no injury. That, by definition, is a war of aggression, and is illegal according to international law. I believe that that alone is enough to have him hauled off to the Hague.

But I'd rather see him hooded and dragged off to Gitmo for an indefinite "timeout". He has been a very bad boy, after all.

[Canuckistanian]

16. Didn't Perle say that the Iraq war could be considered illegal?

Can anyone find the quote? I thought that was a devastating thing to say.

[rumguy]

17. I don't want him tried as a war criminal

It would be ugly and it would divide the country.

Vote him out, and then move on.

[TahitiNut]

24. If the country can't take it, the the country doesn't deserve to exist.

I abhor this "good of the nation" stuff when it comes to dealing with criminal corporations and high-officials. In my opinion, we should have lots more impeachments - of Supreme Court Justices, Appeals Court Judges, Governors, and Presidents. We should also have LOTS more anti-trust break-ups of corporations. Microsoft should've been broken up ten years ago, along with the 3 largest commercial banks.

Hewlett-Packard had a rule of thumb: if any customer is so much of your business that you can't afford to lose them, then they 'own' you. They set it at about 10% and worked to make sure no customer (including Uncle Sam) was more than 10% of their sales. That's when they were a good company.

Likewise, if there's any corporation which, if it were to collapse tomorrow, would cause deep and lasting harm to the people of this country .. then bust 'em up! After all, 'more competition is a good thing,' right?

[kentuck]

19. What if Bush was a civilian...?

and had been out of office about six months, and the Saddam trial was going on, but it had been moved to the Hague? Suppose that George W Bush, the civilian had been called to testify in the trial? Further suppose that George W Bush gets caught in the questioning and exposes his guilt? Suppose several allies of ours requests that President Kerry permit Mr Bush to testify further in the trial? Suppose they issue an indictment against the civilian, Mr Bush? Would President Kerry feel obligated to protect him?