Why does he not get the same treatment by the international community as other dictators who have acted in similar ways? Do you think the Hague beckons?
2007-10-07 08:21:06 · 19 answers · asked by dubie 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Anyone who thinks George Bush was democratically elected obviously did not follow the elections very avidly. Al Gore would have been the democratically elected president following democratic voting standards. And remember, insulting someone doesn't make you more right..
2007-10-08 04:06:59 · update #1
Sadly as President, he is untouchable. Ironically, if he does something immoral, like have sex with an intern, he risks impeachment. Causing thousands of deaths in Iraq is of course hardly relevant.
2007-10-07 08:26:33 · answer #1 · answered by James Mack 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
I am not a George W. Bush fan (and its not a Jr.), but I have no idea which dictators you mean.
While one can debate the war in Iraq, the U.S. has not engaged in genocide or ethnic cleansing. The folks who have been in the Hague (mostly from the wars in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) personally directed ethnic cleansing operations. Unless you have some evidence that George Bush has directed the wholesale slaughter of one of the ethnic groups in Iraq, your question indicates a lack of understanding of what a war crime actually is.
2007-10-07 15:31:26 · answer #2 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Who is going to come get him and take him to the Hague? The Dutch? Maybe the Swiss?
Get off it. He's going back to Crawford, TX after his terms end to live out the rest of his life.
2007-10-07 15:26:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The very fact that you can ask this question without being arrested is proof enough that he is not a dictator. Check your local book store... How many anti-Bush books do you see? Why are those authors not being arrested?
The FACT is that George Bush is not a dictator. You disagree with him, but that does not make him a tyrant.
2007-10-07 15:26:53 · answer #4 · answered by Firestorm 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
you need to do a search before you waste time posting a question as liberal extremists have already posted this question HUNDREDS of times.
the answer is always the same
NO IMPEACHABLE OR PROSECUTABLE BEHAVIORS EXIST AND NO MATTER HOW BAD THE PELOSI REID REGIME WANTS IT THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS
you can use the clinton behavior as a benchmarck and you will see my point
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
he doesnt get the same treatment as he is not a dictator, the hague doesnt beckon and given the idea that you liberals are going to probably nominate a co conspirator of this clinton..."legacy" perhaps you need to clean up your own house before you sling mud...thanks.
2007-10-07 15:31:30 · answer #5 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
You have yourself in a mix. I can't stand the 'man' but, do you know what dictator really is? I add, I can't stand our recently departed bad twosome only to be replaced with a almost as bad a 'leader' but they are not dictators.. as is not your obnoxious Bush..
2007-10-07 16:08:55 · answer #6 · answered by lizlywatts 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you asked why he's not incriminated, the answer is that he is not a criminal and even if he was ,which country or org has such power as incriminating the united states president? right now we can say he's having more command on other pesidents than they have on him.
2007-10-07 15:40:49 · answer #7 · answered by muson 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
So funny what citicop said - he was democratically elected. I don't understand why it was so bad for Clinton to bed his intern and it was OK for Bush to bomb another country under the pretence of them being responsible for terrorism when everyone with half a brain knows it was people that were Saudi Arabian citizens.
2007-10-07 15:32:38 · answer #8 · answered by helen m 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
George Bush is not a dictator.
He is a democratically elected president with whose policies you disagree.
Rhetoric like that is why no one takes you seriously.
2007-10-07 15:24:20 · answer #9 · answered by Citicop 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
if i have learned 1 thing from answering on yahoo is that every single person that still supports bush is on this site. i would be carefull what you say or else you will make a lot of enemys. you would be safer poking a rabid badger with a spoon.
2007-10-07 15:35:05 · answer #10 · answered by Phil Deese 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋