2007-02-26 01:17:06 · 22 answers · asked by charlie 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
What "crime against humanity" has he committed?
I'm not a big fan of Blair, but I adhere to the use of facts, evidence, proof, logic and reason in arguments.
First, what actions has he done that can be construed as violations of international law? The charges need to be specific, and detailed, and have proof that a crime was actually committed.
Second, based on international law, do his actions reach the level of actually being crimes? Could he even be indicted in a court for these actions?
By all the facts and evidence, there is absolutely no possible way that he could or should be charged.
2007-02-26 01:31:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Can one be prosecuted for stupid questions? Oh, yes Saddam was an angle.
If the coalition capture ALL the world's fossil fuels they'd still have to share because the 1st world's toys require energy for their consumption. If the products can't be used the 1st world's economy collapses. If the 1st world collapses the civil unrest in the deveoped world would be like what the Press says Iraq is like.
2007-02-26 01:28:24 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
What crimes against humanity did he commit?
2007-02-26 01:53:48 · answer #3 · answered by Judge Dredd 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No, he should not be tried nor could desire to the Bush administration. absolutely everyone seems to be so rapid to place those men on trial while Iraq under Saddam became into committing terrible atrocities. He mandatory to be deposed.
2016-10-02 00:28:34 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.It is a reflection of some of the people who answered this when someone says Hitler wasnt a war criminal and didnt kill any Germans?
2007-02-26 05:06:52 · answer #5 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Crimes against the electorate.
2007-02-26 01:27:36 · answer #6 · answered by Morgy 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. That could and should only happen if he has murdered millions of his own people. For instance, Joseph Stalin should've but Hitler shouldn't although in his case it's different. He killed many people around the world and targetted mainly 1 set of people(Jews).
2007-02-26 01:27:14 · answer #7 · answered by Micheal 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
He should pay compensation to all our lads who died I bet our troops believed they signed up to defend Britain not fight for a Hitler like neo nazi Bush. I despise Blair he use media mind control the upsetting thing is these catch phrases like WMD seem to work maybe he should have a quiz show when he retires
2007-02-26 01:29:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Does he have the seance of awareness to his crime? bringing them all accused to the awareness of their afflictions against humanity would be a fitting start.I say, bring the mirror forward that they might see the trail of afflictions they have left in their wake.
2007-02-26 01:24:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
He should be charged for war crimes and agression against other countries along with George Bush
2007-02-26 01:20:01 · answer #10 · answered by Sean D 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋