General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm still waiting for the war crimes charges to be brought against these folks...
And many others, of course. These are just some of the most prominent. We all know why they deserve to be charged.
Rec this thread if you agree.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
randys1
(16,286 posts)according to our justice system
You can murder hundreds of thousands of BROWN people, but if you walk around with an ounce of MJ you will go to prison for many years.
America is B R O K E N
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)that if the administration went after Bushies for war crimes it would not only be unprecedented but would open up Obama and his people to be prosecuted after January 2017.
Sort of like saying that because you didn't bite the snake, it won't bite you.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)>Sort of like saying that because you didn't bite the snake, it won't bite you.
It's worse, thoise people are saying the Obama administration wants to keep its options open as far as being able to commit crimes without fear of repercussion.
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 30, 2014, 09:39 AM - Edit history (1)
My apologizes. This originally said the opposite of what I wanted. I left out the word "not"
I am assuming you would not support. My hands were working faster than my brain.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)But a pardon would be helpful in having them tried by another country. A pardon would possibly untie the Hague's hands in the matter since they point to our duty to prosecute war crimes. If we pardon them, they no longer have that shield and it sends a strong message to the rest of the world (especially Spain) that we will do nothing about them.
Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)Just "look forward" and it magically all goes away. Then call anyone whom dare speak the truth a "hater". Not to mention the "umm no" that I've heard 100 times from party loyalists that put winning ahead of justice and country.
Rec'd.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I'd add Petrayus, abrams and the other leaders in the military. The crimes extend past the civilian leadership.
Mr.Bill
(24,438 posts)would just pardon every one of them, just like HW Bush pardoned the Reagan Gang.
johnnyreb
(915 posts)
Make7
(8,543 posts)
Total: 400,660 bytes
The four versions you used...
Total: 10,081,828 bytes
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)and then I would not have had to see HIS disgusting smirking face again.
Something which kinda makes my day a little bit better.
Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)
oneofthe99 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Jgarrick
(521 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)and the DoD can command the troops to execute a particular action. They are the only ones responsible.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)you can pretend now distanced from the vote they weren't well aware what that vote meant but everyone at the time knew exactly what they were doing.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)... to get the UN Weapons Inspectors back into Iraq, which those two actions accomplished.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)There was a choice and they rejected it. That vote was pure politics they were afraid to look weak in the face of all the USAUSAUSA garbage that was going on then.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)Anyone that took an honest look at the sanctions that were in place in iraq and had been for years knew the WMD claims were BS.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)Pretending those votes happened in a vacuum is ridiculous. Pretending they were just made to get the inspectors back in is also ridiculous especially in the face of the vote on the Levin amendment.
If these same senators had voted for the Levin amendment and then for the IWR I might buy it, but the Levin amendment votes puts the lie to the idea it was about the inspectors.
It was craven politics gambling on bush not doing the wrong thing when he was building up massive amounts of troops in the region. The idea you could believe he was doing anything else either makes them simpletons or craven.
Sorry there is no justification for that vote never was never will be.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)You are not actually seeing everything as it existed at the time the events occurred.
My article will help you with that if you read it.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)It concentrates only on the inspectors and even though you state in your article that they had been in Iraq for months you ignore everything they reported during the months before they pulled out.
Odd that.
I also find it strange that you accuse me of ignoring everything that was going on at the time while completely ignoring the obvious troop build up not to mention the discovery of the PNAC agenda the existence of the arguably draconian sanctions that were imposed on Iraq leading up to that time and choose to fucus solely on the weapons inspectors.
Someone is ignoring the events leading up to that vote but it isn't me.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I don't 'ignore' everything they reported ... before they pulled out. It has no bearing on what ultimately happened. Their final reports should have prevented the war. That's the title of the article and the thesis.
The troop buildup has no bearing on the wrong decision and the PNAC agenda adds nothing to the readers understanding of the wrong decision, unless there is some proof that this is what the Bush administration used as the basis for its decision. Some folks say oil, some folks say to right the wrongs of his father's administration, etc. There is no proof of exactly why.
My article concentrates on facts and what was happening at the time. Not guesses and not revisionist history.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Your article concentrates in my opinion on why the IWR should not have been justifiably used to start the war given the inspectors reports. It does nothing to address the vote for the resolution itself.
After the vote it was too late. Bush had been given the authorization to do whatever he damn well pleased and what he damn well pleased was completely obvious before the vote for all of the reasons I mentioned and many more.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
burnsei sensei
(1,820 posts)particularly for their work of the last few years.
But they weren't part of this particular machine.
And machine it was.
Evil to the core.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)until she's carried out two MORE Bush terms in office.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)We do have people who do not have broadband. I do but this loaded slowly for me too.
mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)and a 
it will be a while!!
99Forever
(14,524 posts).. doncha know?
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)I am not even sure who half of those people are, but then again I am not an M$M news junkie following a soap opera.
It would have been nice if you had listed names instead of using pictures that my computer is perhaps STILL trying to download.
And we know they deserve to be charged because that is so much more important than creating jobs or helping the poor.
Yes, yes, yes, I KNOW that we can do more than ONE thing.
Which would make it puzzling as to why there is not currently a thread that you started about creating jobs or helping the poor which is likely to get 100 recs.
We can push for BOTH, for MANY, and yet we are seemingly NOT doing so.
burnsei sensei
(1,820 posts)And I'm glad you included the turpid Mr. Addington.
He was very secretive about his work, wanted to stay as low as possible.
No forgiveness.
None. Not for them.
malaise
(270,679 posts)Fuck Yoo posse
Rec
G_j
(40,373 posts)HD469
(23 posts)
indepat
(20,899 posts)superpower for as long as it maintains its superpower powers. Their total and absolute fiscal madness will make it difficult to maintain its superpowers imo. 