2007-01-19 13:29:17 · 9 answers · asked by LeoTrotzkij 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Is he responsible for starting a war?
Was the war not legally authorized by the UN Security Council?
Can one reasonably conclude that war crimes may have been committed?
If the answer to those three questions is yes, then obviously, he should be tried for war crimes.
2007-01-19 13:36:40 · answer #1 · answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Nope.What "conflict crimes" do you talk of?in case you propose invading Iraq,then you definately greater helpful contain all the Congress Democrats and Republicans alike who voted to do it.additionally,all the politicians of all the international locations that took section.(Australia,uk,Japan,and so on).
2016-12-12 15:42:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Technically, Bush is responsible for the war crimes but those directly liable are the soldiers who committed the crimes.
2007-01-19 13:32:36 · answer #3 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
As soon as Ray Nagin is tried and convicted for mass murder for the close to two thousands deaths during and after Katrina, Bush can be tried for war crimes.
2007-01-19 13:31:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
No way. It is legally & morally wrong to put a person on trial when there is no evidence that that person has committed any crimes.
2007-01-19 13:49:31 · answer #5 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
What war crimes? What crimes did he commit and how did he commit them? This is an absurd statement. Especially since you are not citing any sources.
2007-01-19 13:34:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
1. Never
2. We do not report to international law. We are a sovereign nation
2007-01-19 13:34:53 · answer #7 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
If had committed any, sure. Since he hasn't, your "question" is absurd.
2007-01-19 13:32:20 · answer #8 · answered by Rick N 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
What crimes??? Please inform me of "crimes".
2007-01-19 13:33:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋