There are so many questions of the legalities and lies of this war, why isn't he atleast tried in court? If he is a war criminal that cost thousands of lives shouldn't he be accountable? Is lying about reasons to go to war a crime?
2007-08-18 14:50:56 · 15 answers · asked by Ryan G 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
No, going to war under false pretenses is not a crime -- becaseu Congress authorized the use of military force -- hence, the invasion of Iraq was legal, regardless of the reasons for it. And lying is only illegal when it's under oath -- that's perjury. But Bush has not done that either.
Bush has committed war crimes are defined by federal statute (18 USC 2441) -- this has been confirmed by the US Supreme Court (see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2006) and by his own admissions. But not for Iraq -- it was for violation of the Geneva Conventions as enacted into federal law with respect to the Gitmo detainees.
The reason he has not been tried (impeached) is political -- there is no possible way that 2/3 of the Senate would vote to convict -- regardless of how much evidence was presented. Especially with the presiding Chief Justice being a recent Bush appointee.
And since there is no possibility of conviction, there is no point in holding the trial. So Bush gets to violate the law at will because he has rigged the system to be immune.
2007-08-18 15:45:06 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
War crimes is a legal term of art that relates to the conduct of wars. Under various conventions and treaties, certain conduct is illegal -- e.g. torture of POWs, use of chemical weapons, genocide. War crimes are international crimes.
The act of going to war is not a war crime. To the extent that going to war under false pretenses could be a crime, it would fall under domestic law. Putting aside the debates about improper inferences and conclusions drawn from the intelligence, there is no proof that any administration official knowingly and under oath made false statements about the intelligence (President Bush and Vice President Cheney were never under oath.) Making erroneous public statements when not under oath is not a crime.
2007-08-18 19:16:13 · answer #2 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First off, every body in the world, including the Clinton administration, the UN inspectors, the British, the French, the Russians, believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
This is a known, indisputable fact.
Second, the Congress of the United States approved the action.
Now, if you want to discuss strategic and tactical errors after the invasion and whether that rises to the level of stupidity, I am there with you.
But war crimes....
Supposing Bush had not gone into Iraq and supposing Saddam worked with Al Quaeda to successfully pull off some sort of chemical weapons attack in the US that killed thousands of people and devastated the economy....
Is this an acceptable alternate present state of affairs to what is happening now?
2007-08-18 15:03:08 · answer #3 · answered by VampireDog 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Many people who feel they were lied to about the war are being lied to once again or are willfully lying about the war.
Either way you look at it, it all spells politics as usual...
When Bush took office he wanted to change the tone in Washington and he did. Democrats went from arguing emotionally to a shrill litany of name-calling, meaningless chants, and misinformation. Republicans went from arguing intellectually to analytical paralysis, self-doubt, and confusion.
I support your right to say anything you want, but try and find a shred of truth first.
If lying is such a crime why do you seem so eager?
2007-08-18 16:27:12 · answer #4 · answered by paradigm_thinker 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You ask why he's not tried for war crimes and then ask what a war crime is? Jeez.
2007-08-18 17:22:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am so sick and tired of hearing this Bush lied about the war!! Obviously he didn't or he would have been tried already. Congress has used up a zillion dollars in tax money with a zillion investigations and have yet to come up with anything. And if they did they'd have to be quiet cause the democrats were part of it.
2007-08-18 14:57:40 · answer #6 · answered by Brianne 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
then you will have to do the same for all of congress, and the senate, because they all voted on the same information that bush had. They are all in this together, let's hold them all responsible.
2007-08-18 15:15:59 · answer #7 · answered by out for justice. 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The fact that he wasn't impeached is proof there is no difference between republican and democrats they all profit from war. They were all in on it.
2007-08-18 15:26:03 · answer #8 · answered by Rich 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Clintoon went to war in Bosnia for no reason.....it was a civil war, we had no business being there, but he put us there.
2007-08-18 17:03:32 · answer #9 · answered by mrs_endless 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Our politicians can get away with whatever they want because WE have become a nation of COWARDS!
That is the ugly truth!
2007-08-18 16:29:52 · answer #10 · answered by The law is a form of tyranny. 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋