Is the Bush administration a bunch of war criminals?

Question

We saw the Bush administration throw peaceful Iraq into war, slaughtering thousands of innocents, far more than those alleged by Hussein, and in the process disregarding all international laws. My own innocent country was drawn in at knife point under Bush's brutal "with us or against us" policy. We have seen far more death, destruction and deceit, than any accused by the US, and yet Bush is free and proud. What do you think - Is the Bush administration a bunch of war criminals?

Of course there is not yet any evidence suggesting that Hussein was behind the slaughtering of curds at all - current suspects are Iran. Internation Law - the law recognised by an already established and recognised coalition of nations eg UN.

And Iraq was at war with...? - Nobody. There was Iran for a while, but only under US authority.

If under the Bush administration there is no international law, Bush is an international criminal.

Feel free to call me un-American. That's the funniest yet, because I'm not American, not in America, and never have been, and have no connection to America. And shock and suprise! Most of the world is not American. Who's the uneducated one here?

Answer 1

No more than Winstone Churchill or FDR. You have every right to not agree with a person's policies, the problem is you need more facts that the propagandized junk you wrote down.
First off, if you think Iraq was peaceful before the war, you don't know anything about Iraq. In a dictatorship where opposition was fed to the wood chipper. Did you so easily forget about the mass graves found there ? did you forget about the gasing of the Kurdish in the 90's ? The disappearances of friends, family and neighbors that didn't agree with the regiem ? How about the honor killings of women ? That's sounds peaceful ? The factions of muslims were already killing each other, we just gave the shiite a fighting chance against an oppressive government.
As for international laws that were disregarded, lets here them ? Reagan disregarded the international community when he dealt with a few coutnries, and guess what...the USA won and we are better for it. Every country and every government has a right to make sure they can protect their citizens and preserve their way of life. We weren't at war with any muslim nations, yet everything from the state sponsored terrorists in the 1700's ...Pirates of the barbarian coast for those less learned, to today, we didn't provoke anything....then the Beirut marine barracks was bombed, and the twin towers was bomed in the 80's, how about when Iran took US hostages ? or 911 ? just how much crap you think we are suppose to put up with without action ?
America has been patient enough. the UN even signed resolutions regarding Iraq to cooperate or else. They were too wimpy to go through with their consensus, so America acted and gave them back their credibility. If the UN holds no sway and can't even do what it says it will, then how can it ever be a viable international force for peace for the future ?
I can't say I know what country you are from or speak of, but your leaders obviously agreed. Perhaps they shouldn't promise to help if they don't intend to do so. I can't speak to that.
But we sent in inspectors, they kicked them out, we sent them in again and Iraq accused them of bein spies and kicked them out again. We talked for over 4 years and nothing was accomplished. We know they had Chemical weapons, biological was a possibility and even if they didn't have nuclear, they would have interest in developing them. We just didn't know. Every intelligence agency in the world thought he did, and Saddam never denied it.
If preservation of one's country is a war crime, then everyone is guilty. You all want this ONE WORLD POWER. How do you expect to do that or even have piece when you have a radical religious faction out there that is world wide, well funded and deals nothing but death ? They have no honor, or value of human life. They don't care if they kill non-combatants, civilians or the innocent.
I don't agree we should let the world go to hell in a hand basket to appease the whiners, unpatriotic or idealists with little base in reality.

Answer 2

Hmmm...metaphorically yes, but not literally. Americans need to vote them out next election. An impeachment process and decree from the Senate in regards to troop removal from BOTH Afghanistan and Iraq is a good idea. I think the U.S. should impose harsher sanctions on Iran and pursue negotiations with them. Israel should wait and see what happens but maintain the occupation in the West Bank. Food and medicine should be allowed into Gaza but all peace talks should be suspended until the 'situations' between Israel, the U.S., Iran, Lebanon and Syria have cleared up, (at least three years, no reward for voting in 2006).

Answer 3

Wow. There's so much wrong with what you're saying, that it's really hard to know where to begin.

PEACEFUL Iraq? You're kidding me, right? Saddam only murdered around 300,000 Kurds. That's how he kept the peace. Americans haven't killed that many civilians, and when we do it, it's not on purpose. Saddam targeted civilians; we don't.

There is no international law.

If you think Bush is a war criminal, then you have absolutely no knowledge of history. Do you know who the REAL war criminals are? People like the Nazis, who systematically exterminated 6 million Jews. Someone like Joseph Stalin, who murdered 20 million of his own people. People like Saddam Hussein, who murdered 300,000 of his own people. People like Slobodan Milosevic, who ethnically cleansed an entire country.

You don't have to agree with Bush or the war. But to call Bush a war criminal shows just how incredibly uneducated you are.

Richard J: I'm glad you're not an American, because I don't want to be associated with someone as bigoted and hateful as you. I've seen other posts you've written. You celebrated 9/11, you piece of human debris. You're also anti-Christian. Who else do you hate? Jews? Blacks? Gays?

If you don't like America, fine. But get off our internet.

Answer 4

No. He had to have finished extra undesirable than sturdy. i think of that the two events will agree that Carter replaced into the worst president of all time. Clinton is someplace interior the right ten of worst. Reagan and Bush II are interior the right ten of ultimate.

Answer 5

Nope. Sorry to disappoint you, but you obvious bitterness towards the fact that your side got what it deserves doesn't make Bush or his administration "war criminals." If you want to find those, go to Palestine, Sudan, Chechnya, Kashmir, Somalia, the Philippines, Pakistan, or any other country under siege by radical islamic extremists. I'm out.

Answer 6

Iraq was peaceful? I think your definition of peace is flawed.
Peace through fear is not peace. The ones who tried to rise up was killed with WMD's of the president or Iraq.

Maybe your hatred for Bush blinds you to the truths of the world.

That or your lack of Historical knowledge of the region.

Answer 7

Apologist for the Baathists.

Been awhile since one of those crawled out of the pit.

Welcome aboard.

Answer 8

no - i hope i get best answer