Can Bush be tried of war crimes.....in Iraq?

Question

Can the Iraqi people put him on trial for war crimes?

Answer 1

Yes he can and he should be tried already!!!

The United Nations charter has a provision which was agreed to by the United States formulated by the United States in fact, after World War II. It says that from now on, no nation can use armed force without the permission of the U.N. Security Council. They can use force in connection with self-defense, but a country can't use force in anticipation of self-defense. Regarding Iraq, the last Security Council resolution essentially said, “Look, send the weapons inspectors out to Iraq, have them come back and tell us what they've found -- then we'll figure it out from there.” The U.S. was impatient, and decided to invade Iraq -- which was all pre-arranged of course. So, the United States went to war, in violation of the charter. Making the war in Iraq an “illegal” war.

Bush lied to Congress and the American people about WMD and the orchestrated attacks of 911.

US Law Concerning War Crimes
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 >
§§ 2441. War crimes
(a) Offense.-- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection
(b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
(b) Circumstances.--- The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
(c) Definition.--- As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct (1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;

(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907; (3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or (4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.
Source(s):

The evidence is overwhelming he must be brought to trial.

Answer 2

particular, he ought to. besides, if he has no longer something to conceal why ought to he difficulty approximately status trial? the spectacular wingers on right here have been particularly satisfied to be certain the shoe thrower get 2 years reformatory so as that they of course have self assurance in the Iraqi judicial gadget. by the way, right here in the united kingdom the only people who believed in WMD's have been the pro-conflict politicians. every person else who had accompanied the problem knew that Saddam had none left. they had the two been used against the Kurds, (with the tacit help of the U. S. and uk), or they had become degraded over the years. besides, the place did they arrive from initially? the country! all the scientists, all the weapons inspectors, all the newshounds knew there have been no WMD's, yet Bush and Blair needed their conflict so the 'huge lie' become unfold. human beings forget approximately that Saddam become the darling of the West...and a pal of the U. S., previous to the 1st Gulf conflict.

Answer 3

I doubt it. They didn't win. He would have to commit a crime . Where are all the charges . Won't the people you put in office represent you? I hear you making accusations but I just don't see any action. It isn't hard if there is a crime,remember Clinton?

Answer 4

Not with the equal treatement to the Dems that were and have been in offices.
Such as Bill Clinton and his follies in Haitti, Bosnia, Somolia, and also try him for treason for his lack luster record for "protecting the Constitution" "defending America from all enemy's forgien and domestic" and the disgracing of the office of the Presidency.
Also Carter for his follies to take another President down.

And some current senators and representives that are in office right now.

So nope, he won't be tried.

Answer 5

Why go to Iraq, there are 3100+ families here that should sue him, not to mention all those who he destroyed through his devastation of the nation's economy, or the failure to do anything about Katrina...

Answer 6

Mom the Dems. said they will Impeach the President for this illegal war, what are they waiting for ?

Answer 7

i don't know if he actually CAN be tried....i think he should be tried though...

if not there than definitely here, there's thousands of families from Hurricane Katrina victims to families of dead or severely injured U.S. soldiers that I'm sure would be more than happy to testify.

Answer 8

Yes. Mr Bush would rather not be confronted with them .

Answer 9

wishing death upon him eh? I don't like the man either, but.... that's kind of un-liberal ain't it?

Answer 10

no