| Should U.S. government officials (including GWB & VP Cheney) be charged with war crimes in international court? |
|
|
|
Asked 4 years ago
by derlehrer  Mexico |
|
About
Retired from Office of Child Support Enforcement, State of Arkansas. Former teacher of German, English, & French. Learning Spanish!
|
6 Points
|
No, but I believe the President of Mexico might qualify for that honor by aiding and abetting persons committing illegal acts, for breaking up families within Mexico, for having its law enforcement agencies look the other way while illegal acts are performed.
Which of Mexico's presidents? Fox? He was GWB's buddy, remember? And nothing that you mentioned qualifies as "war crimes" -- while illegal acts, they are far from violations of the Geneva Conventions. (And where do you get your information?)
Fox News and Rush Limbaugh of course... are there any other sources?
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
Fox news is the only real news in the U.S.. Rush is not a journalist and never claimed to be...unlike your network blowhards.
Are you saying McNeil Lehrer is not "real" news, but Shephard Smith is? Give me a break. My network? How do you know what "my" network is yake?
Why is Mexico urging it's citizens to leave Mexico by refusing to provide necessities for it's people? Mexico is a well developed country selling oil. They are going to seal the border to any returning Mexican citizens. Chew on that, and come live in Texas. Better yet let your country provide for illegals as U.S. has, and quit bitching about us.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted by derlehrer .
[1 point] 4 years ago byThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyI think the people of Mexico need to look at the rampant corruption and graft in their own country before they start criticizing our government. If ours is so bad why are you all coming here? I am willing to prosecute the Mexican government for allowing modern day bandidos to kidnap and kill American citizens.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
It is a Mexican asking the question.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyActually, it is a U.S. citizen residing in Mexico (born & reared in TEXAS) who is asking. You see how assumptions divert from the issue?
They aren't "all" coming here, crazy. Besides, even if their government is rife with corruption and graft, what does that have to do with the question? Do two wrongs make a right?
Reviewing this thread after so long, I realize I should have responded to this inane comment: "If ours is so bad why are you all coming here?" I am a U.S. citizen who chose to retire to and reside in Mexico. What does THAT do to your argument??? The crimes of Mexico do not make acceptable the crimes of U.S. government officials.
This comment was deleted.
[0 points] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[0 points] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyDon't you believe that the invasion of Iraq itself was a criminal act? This was a unilateral war based upon lies, after all, waged against a sovereign nation who posed no threat to the U.S.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyActually, if the world community followed the example set by the Allies following WWII, they could compound the charges. The war itself was a violation of world treaties, and the torture of prisoners is a crime against humanity.
I am NOT going to trash this President because a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals want to feel sorry for a group of terrorists. Some people get their rocks off by trashing ANY U.S.President for ANY reason.
The problem I see with this post is the assumption that everyone accused is a "terrorist"! Guilty until proved innocent? Besides, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the question!
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyTheodore Roosevelt (he was a President, Mags) said, "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
I don't believe the Geneva Convention rules apply to terrorists because they're not technically members of a foreign military.
Then why are they held in a military prison (Guantanamo) by the U.S. military and facing military courts? Why wouldn't they be charged in the U.S. court system?
Because it's safer to keep them there than having them try to convert others in a normal prison
Once again, here is the presumption of "guilty until proved innocent"! Have you noticed recent news accounts of "murderers" on death row who have been released because DNA evidence proved they had nothing to do with the crime? Why do you assume that arrested prisoners are guilty (without any proof)? Besides, are other prisoners so weak-minded that "terrorists" can convert them to "terrorism"? You aren't serious, are you?
I never said they were guilty. But it's safer to keep them away from other prisoners as a precaution. If a prison warden thinks one prisoner is going to kill another, they don't wait til it happens to they're "guilty," they avoid the situation before it happens. I think it's better in this case to keep them in a different environment so the situation doesn't occur.
Oh, boy! You are really grasping at straws! I won't bother to trace the comments on the thread; I think everyone is capable of reading them for themselves. Somehow the discussion went from "Geneva Conventions" to "...one prisoner is going to kill another...." Taking your logic one step further, everyone on earth should be thrown into prison by the "authorities" because any potential threat should be avoided "...before it happens"! "Precaution" dictates that anyone and everyone is a potential threat. Can we get back to the question? In view of multiple violations of human rights and Geneva Conventions (the question asks) should the Bush Administration (multiple layers) be charged in international court? After all, the U.S. led the prosecution of war criminals following World War II -- thus setting the standard.
What is AlQueada's country?
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyTake a look at the board. Notice that the majority of "no" votes come from the U.S. Does the word "brainwashed" mean anything to you?
Did you realize a majority of the overall votes came the U.S.? Your statement means nothing.
Okay. Even if ALL the votes came from the U.S., the "yes" votes are 52% and the "no" votes are only 48% (at the time of this post). So using your logic, even the "majority" in the U.S. think that the current administration should be charged with war crimes.
Ok, I'm not saying they shouldn't be. I'm just saying your logic was flawed with the brainwashing comment.
No, actually the comment was very a propos. The United States citizenry is receiving a very biased picture of the reality of the situation. The rest of the world does not suffer under this illusion. A citizen who wants to be informed will pursue news reports from around the world and stop relying on U.S. media. Try Great Britain, Germany, or anywhere else -- if you truly want to be informed. (Start with "The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.")
That is a YES, unless the Geneva Conventions( I do believe the US signed them?)are, like the US Constitution "just a g.d. piece of paper"?
You say: "just a g.d. piece of paper"? Is that a reference to GWB's statement when warned that his actions were a violation of the U.S. Constitution? (Quote: "Stop talking to me about the Constitution! It's just a god-d****ed piece of paper!") Didn't he take an oath to protect and defend it?
Just to further reinforce my point that the U.S. public is "brainwashed": 52% of the respondents say "Yes"! But only 44% of U.S. respondents! I see a major problem: Either the U.S. citizenry is uninformed, or they simply think the U.S. can do no wrong. To the latter I pose this question: Why are the evil actions of the Nazi's that were prosecuted at Nuremberg now acceptable when performed by the U.S.? What makes these acts acceptable today?
As of today (27 Feb 08) 53% of respondents say "yes"! So why aren't other nations demanding accountability in international court????
Watch this documentary:
http://www.torturingdemocracy.org
and then vote.
Thanks, Chipmonk! Hopefully, the polls will prove true, Obama will be our next President, and he will take his responsibilities seriously, choosing to prosecute the criminals that have been in power these last 8 years!!!
Well, "Shrub" is out of office and Obama is our President. Should the afore-mentioned parties be charged before the World Court with war crimes & violation of the Geneva Conventions?