I've been hearing this a lot and this comes because of the crisis in Iraq and Afghanistan. Word is that they might go to the world tribunals at The Hague (Netherlands) based on accusations of genocide. What do you think about this? I have to say that I think the current military efforts in the Mid East are a waste of human lives, both on the Iraqis/Afghans and the US/UK troops.
2007-03-27 06:13:41 · 22 answers · asked by zaxxon 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think whoever started this rumor has no idea what genocide means, nor do they understand that the United States would NEVER turn over an ex-president to the Hague, no matter how stupid he is. If they want him, they can try to come get him; but nobody in the world has the military might to take him against his will. If anything, he should be impeached in our own courts for gross incompetence.
2007-03-27 06:24:27 · answer #1 · answered by Beardog 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush wanted to end what his father has began. Poodle Blair observed blindly and against advice from the specialists who reported that there exchange into no data that there weapons of mass destruction. Brown has been left to sparkling up the mess. the two men ought to be held for account and tried for conflict crimes even though it fairly is extremely uncertain that they are going to stand trial so do no longer carry your breath.
2016-12-08 12:29:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The person who told you this is wrong- it is not even a popular rumor let alone a possibility. Genocide is defined as "The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group." Clearly this is not present in Iraq or Afghanistan. You are free to think what you will about troop and civilian sacrifices in the Middle East, but pay no heed to politically influenced rumors like this one.
2007-03-27 06:19:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Genocide is kind of a stretch for this war....Unless the Rawandan government goes first you can harldy say bush and blair are like that.... over a million people died in Rawanda.... I bet not 100,000 have died in Iraq or Afghanistan and that is 2 wars.....
2007-03-27 06:23:34 · answer #4 · answered by Johnny Mek 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Lets see the stats:
Iraqi civilian deaths since the beginning of the war - 60,000 (keeping in mind that most insurgents are civilians).
Iraqi civilian death under Saddam prior to the war - 600,000 (of just the documented ones).
Interesting comparison.
2007-03-27 06:26:56 · answer #5 · answered by daisyk 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No. Genocide implies deliberate ethnic or racial extermination of civilian populations. That's not happened in Iraq or Afghanistan.
2007-03-27 06:24:08 · answer #6 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Bush and Blair will maybe get a slap on the wrist. I think war sucks,we can't get our country on track ,yet we are trying to fix all the others.
2007-03-27 06:20:26 · answer #7 · answered by TCC Revolution 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
One does not stand trial for a crime that one has not yet been formally charged with. If charged, both would be acquitted, as they did not commit the crimes your idiot brain has invented.
2007-03-27 06:18:47 · answer #8 · answered by jh 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
No.
It might be a good idea if you were to expand your research arena beyond the media outlets that only tell you what you want to hear.
2007-03-27 06:20:11 · answer #9 · answered by P T 2 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Nope...No Genocide.....No Crimes......No charges.....No Trial.
Like you, we also think that people that bash our President and Administration are a waste of human life....
Have a nice life, in whatever country you choose to move to.
2007-03-27 06:19:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋