I have a dream, that is for the camera's to be rolling when they drag him and his war criminal staff down the white house steps. All of them in handcuffs and leg irons and wearing orange jump suits. Headed for the Hague to be tried as war criminals. They started a war based on a lie. They continue the policy that is getting innocent people, old men, woman and children killed every day and I wouldn't be able to set on the jury as I feel that they are guilty and would have to prove different.
2006-07-10 12:57:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Three words define the reason Bush has not been impeach, imprisoned or charged with war crimes: Power, power and power. Another cynical answer is, remember the Golden Rule. "Them that has the gold, rules." Bush and Lincoln share a dubious distinction of being the two presidents who subverted the Constitution the extreme most.
Lincoln as he forced the southern states to remain in the Union even though It was originally agreed at the signing of ther Declaration Of Independence that any member state who wanted to leave the Union had the right to do so.
Bush, on the other hand, has declared illegal wars, rescinded much of our Constitutional rights and caused the deaths of oh so many people because it was good business for him and his friends who are invested in Oil, Mines, and all other big business.
Bush is not the first, just the worst.
2006-07-10 19:53:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by wordytom 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
actually, he did commit the crime according to the conventions. The difference is that the executive office opted out of the clause that would apply to prosecuting Bush. In other words, the Bush administration knew it could be held accountable for its actions of violence abroad without a formal declaration of war, so they formally declared beforehand that they disagreed with the wording of the international law, and dropped out from the agreement. Thus, even though the Bush administration did commit the crime, it cannot be held accountable for it.
They did this with the Kyoto agreement as well, that would have restricted U.S. pollution. It's all in the papers and the official documents.
2006-07-10 19:50:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by satyr9one 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Many people believe he is.
Those countries which at one time were close allies have distanced themselves from the US (and to a certain extent, the UK) because of the Little Thug Prince and Tony Blair, his most bestest and funtabulous girlfriend and closest foreign cohort.
Will he/they be charged as a war criminal? LOL! I seriously doubt it; however, murmurings of a Bush impeachment are being heard more frequently on the beltway these days.
Personally, I believe 'war criminal' is a wee bit too strong a term regardless of what 'crimes' we may perceive as having been committed.
2006-07-10 20:03:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Specious λ Neurotica 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Half of the African leaders and Kim Jong-Il rate as war-criminals, yet aren't labeled as such. Bush simply needs a couple of good slaps from the Supreme Court (one of which he got fairly recently).
2006-07-10 19:49:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by wizpatrus 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because he lets idiots like Mona live within the boundaries of his country. You have no clue, Do you? The United States is becoming less and less powerful, because idiots like you stand up and voice their opinions. You then have legislators and senators who go and stick up for you in D.C. If the U.S. shows any weakness, there are plenty of countries that would love to bomb the soil that you are walking on today. Instead of bagging your president, you should be sending him thank you notes for the freedom you have to be an idiot.
2006-07-11 12:02:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Coop 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps because he is not a criminal?
If we use your logic we need to condemn President Roosevelt and Harry Truman. Per the statistic over 37.2 million civilians died during WWII. We need to also condem Kennedy and Johnson for Vietnam - 2-4 million civilians.
2006-07-10 19:56:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush because he has declared himself immune to all laws and the Constitution.
Clinton was part of a UN voted operation so don't point him out without naming the entire UN and world leaders
2006-07-10 19:56:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You're retarded. I guess you could ask the same question about Congress since they approve everything. Why don't you just say it about the entire US gov't. Dream on, you're one sided CNN views won't get ya very far.
I hope you voted in the last election, otherwise you have no room to complain.
2006-07-10 19:45:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton did too in Bosnia and Yugoslavia
2006-07-10 19:44:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bill 6
·
0⤊
0⤋