2007-03-23 05:42:45 · 15 answers · asked by JP 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yes.
2007-03-23 05:47:45 · answer #1 · answered by plhudson01 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are doing some serious drugs!!! first of all, look at the number of people tortured and murdered under Saddam. Look at just the Kurdish villages that were sprayed with poison and all the people, kids too, died.
This world is cruel place to live and as long as there are tin horn two bit dictators like Saddam who want to take over the world, YOU better be thankful we have someone who is willing to send troops in harms way and try to save lives in America.
Bush is no more a war criminal than Ike, Roosevelt or any other President who had a war to fight. Would you rather we sit back and wait for the sequel to 911, when the terrorists pick more targets and begin to blow up people on our city streets???? If Gore had been President, we would still be discussing 911 and it would be wholesale slaughter on the streets of America.
2007-03-23 12:50:44 · answer #2 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes but it will never happen Our own reps don't give a rats *** that this man continues to do the evil he does.The rest of the worlds goverments are too dependent on us to raise a finger to bring any charges against him.I think if some country would have the nerve to do this Americans would ban together and send a message to our reps and say" HELL NO WERE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE" BUT THAT IS ALL WISHFUL THINKING!!!!!!No one will go against King George..Just like Hitler's people didn't go after him..Isn't it weird that America got involved in that war because of the evil Hitler is but GWB can invade a country and allow the deaths of thousands of innocents and yet He still runs a country?hummmmmmmm what does that say about us?
2007-03-23 12:55:00 · answer #3 · answered by Angelbaby 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no violation of law there buddy. But to answer your question, hell no. What we are doing in Iraq is a good thing. Unfortunately, it was brought on a bit premature and under false pretense which sucks ***. We created the mess in the middle east, but we sure as hell can't just run away and lick our wounds. That place is a total mess and the only way my grandchildren will live in a better world, is if we act now with courage and resolve EVERYWHERE.
2007-03-23 12:52:35 · answer #4 · answered by MB1096 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the US never signed the CI treaty, so I don't think the US recognizes that Americans can be tried in the ICC.
But yes, I do.
2007-03-23 12:46:41 · answer #5 · answered by Waiting and Wishing 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. The US is not a party to the ICC, so they have no jurisdiction. It would require either Bush to surrender to their jurisdiction (not!), or an armed force taking him from the US and dragging him before the ICC (messy).
Bush did violate US federal laws for war crimes (18 USC 2441), as confirmed by the US Supreme Court (Hamdan v. Rumsfled). But the only forum for charge is impeachment.
2007-03-23 12:47:44 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
You know, this statement has done nothing but be repetitive. You're kicking a dead horse. Try something new for once.
2007-03-23 12:49:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Forget Iraq! What about his crimes against the AMERICAN people!?
2007-03-23 12:46:26 · answer #8 · answered by Whoops, is this your spleeen? 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Guess what he has not violated international law unlike your friends in Cuba and North Korea
2007-03-23 12:47:07 · answer #9 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
more for violating UN treaties regarding illegal pre-emptive strikes and for the gross violations of the Geneva convention. BTW: the US helped write those documents.
2007-03-23 12:48:59 · answer #10 · answered by Alan S 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Do you think asking this Q will have any affect on reality? Can you say, NOT?
2007-03-23 12:46:53 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋