Since planning a war is a war crime, why isn't Bush a war criminal?

Question

Geneva Conventions, Nuremberg Principles.

Answer 1

Is planning a war really a war crime? The pentagon has probably hundreds of "pre-mix" war scenarios for all kinds of circumstances. If a thought ever becomes a crime, let me know so I can take part in the revolution.

Don't let hatred of Bush get in the way of knowing he is not a war criminal. It is probably really tempting for people to want to accuse him of these things, but let's be intellectually honest, okay?

Answer 2

Me (a poster above) provided good info on the topic. While the issue of whether the Iraq war is a war of aggression or not is quite controversial, under the principles III and VI stated in the post above Bush is still guilty of war crimes (violations of the laws or customs of war). For example, ill-treatment POWs and civilians (since not all prisoners taken into custody are found to be connected to the insurgency) at Abu Ghraib fits the profile.

Of course, both the Geneva Convention and the Nuremberg Principles apply to losers and never to winners, so Bush will never be charged, but such is life.

Answer 3

Planning and intituting a war is not an international crime. The only international standards are the Geneva Convention whose laws only pertain to how a war is engaged. You know, treatment of detaines. no poison gasses, etc. This convention was passed after the herrendous wepons used during WWI. The US and most European countries are signatories of these rules.

Was Saddam Hussien brought up for war crimes by the World Court, the UN or the Geneva Convention even though he gassed thousands of his own citizens (the Kurds), gassed thousands of Iranians during his two wars with them, massly executeded thousands of his own citizens and buried them in mass graves, tortured and intimidated thousands just to retain his own power, and also attempted to assasinate the first president, George Bush???

Where is your personal indignation about that? I guess if the US or George Bush is involved it is evil.

The president of the US has a constitutional obligation to act in the interests of the US to protect our soverignty. George Bush was elected by the majority of the US citizens whether you like him or not. I think the majority of our citizens approve of his actions or he would have been long gone a long time ago.

We do not live in a country run by polls, intellectual eleiists, the media, university professor propogandists etc. We live in a representative republic which is a democracy. True democracy is mob rule.

Your strong feelings might prevail in some future election but you have to wait and have respect for our system of government. Perhaps you will become president. The burden is heavy beyond comprehension.

You make George Bush, our government and our military to be an evil institution. We are a country of very humane people of mixed ancestory and diverse religions who abhor war. Do you think the US just jumped into WWI and WWII. Like today our society was evenly divided. You are very lucky to be born in this country. You have the ability to make a change.

Why is it that the US is always your enemy when so much evil , corruption, and cruelty pervades throughout the world and in the UN itself.. I do not understand.

Perhaps you should visit the Peoples Socialists Republic of North Korea and see how the enlightened rulers treat their opponents and citizens. Actually a trip to Russia or enlightend country of France might surfice. Or maybe a tour of the Austwitch ovens would help to you understand what evil rulers are about and why the Nazis were tried in the World court..

Bill Clinton also conducted a war in the former country of Yugoslovia (Bosnia, Serbia etc). Should he be held accountable? Many inocent people were killed by the bombing raids conducted by his order as Commander and Chief of the US

War is a terrible thing but it is better then bringing the war to our own land which is what would happen if we were not making a stance in another country.

Our constitution does not require a Decleration of War by Congress. This is a misconception and was only done after the attack on Pearl Harbor years after WWII had started..

Please excuse my spelling as the spell checker is working.

Answer 4

I've often asked myself this question. If there are no weapons of mass destruction then there was no reason to go into Iraq. Some might say we went in because of Saddam's crimes against his own people. The United States never opposed Saddam during this time and as a matter of fact, provided funding and weapons to Saddam. This war is the beginning of the preemptive war scheme. www.newamericancentury.org
If one considers the implication of such an act as preemptive war then the world has enough justification to attack the United states.

Answer 5

A defensive war is not a war crime in itself, but everything revolves around determining to what extent a preemptive war can be considered defensive (for which very good arguments can be found, see link below).

All countries are planning for war - they just hope they will never have to implement those plans.
.

Answer 6

It might happen. One of the catalyst for the Nuremberg trials was the International Red Cross charging the Nazis with war crimes.

Currently, the International Red Cross is doing the same with the criminal Bush administration.

Answer 7

ok, now to respond to the question. Having lived via it i'm totally qualified to respond to. lower back in the course of the Eisenhower administration Russia were given the A-bomb and then the H-bomb by "stealing" the secrets and techniques from us. Congress change into scared to lack of life! so that they gave the skill to drop the massive one to the President considering a airplane might want to be in our Air area in a count number of hours. even as the ICBMs arrived on the scene, they were even extra frightened and were happy they'd given the guy the skill. After Vietnam, it change into determined by congress that the Presidential skill to contain us in conflict had to be restricted. They allowed him to wrestle a warfare and/or police action for ninety days. even as desert typhoon got here up, it change into shown that the run up time change into extra like 6 months. So the time period change into prolonged. inspite of the indisputable fact that out this complete time period, Congress consistently retained the right to be the only and really body that could want to declare warfare. they have declared warfare on the regime of Saddam Hussein and it has not been reascended.

Answer 8

Try READING the Geneva Conventions before misinterpreting them.

Answer 9

Hello. Who said he wasn't?! The only people that would defend him against that charge are known liars (as in, "Invading Iraq will be a cakewalk" and "The Iraqis will be throwing flowers at our soldiers").

I think the actual illegality about this war is that Bush started this war without a direct and imminent threat from a credible military power. In other words, Bush started the war because he felt like it and that is not a legal war.

Answer 10

After reading the answers in here it's pretty clear that most of you did any research on the subject. You are all misguided and really don't know what your talking about. Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer who killed for the sake of killing. He butchers his own people and his own family members. His two sons were killers who killed for the love of killing. They are responsible for over a million deaths during their 35 year reign. You uneducated freaking' jerks don't have a clue.