The Bush administration has to be very concerned about war crime charges

[Gman]

The recent disclosure of the Albert Gonzales memo shows they were concerned before going into Iraq. Now that genuine Geneva Convention violations have been documented and proven, If they don't win, there's a very real possibility of being indicted for war crimes either here or at the Hague if the US decides to take no action.

I'm wondering to what lengths will the Bush administration go to stay in the White House next year. I think Kerry could win decisively and Bush may well decide for some faux national security reason that he's not leaving to simply keep from doing hard time among other things.

Thoughts?

[Richardo]

1. Now we know why the US withheld support for the ICC...

I couldn't see it at the time, but now it all comes clear.

[FloridaPat]

3. This was one of the reasons I knew that the claims of WMD in

Iraq were a lie. And also the pResident has a list of 60 countries he wants to invade. There were other things too. He got the president of some international chemical weapons ban group removed because he almost got Sadam into the organization. Then there was the fact that Bush screamed about all those military people that could be charged, but when it came to signed the waver for the US he had the upper military brass and the White House group added to the list.

[lovedems]

4. That was my first thought.

We refused to sign a treaty to establish a international
criminal court that could prosecute war crimes.

There won't be anyone punished by war crimes.

They covered all the bases, they knew from the beginning.

[Village Idiot]

6. Wasn't it previously signed by Bubba

and merely rescinded by the Chimp?

[lovedems]

9. You are absolutely correct.

I didn't know the history of this treaty so a quick google search brought this article up. It is pretty scary if you ask me, they had a plan prior to the inauguration...

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13055

snip
The Bush administration Monday formally renounced its obligations as a signatory to the 1998 Rome Statute to establish an International Criminal Court (ICC). Critics say the decision to "unsign" the treaty will further damage the United States' reputation and isolate it from its allies.

He also helped draft a pending bill in Congress, the American Servicemen's Protection Act (ASPA), which not only bars any U.S. cooperation with the court, but also bars U.S. military aid to other countries unless they agree to shield U.S. troops on their territory from ICC prosecution. It also bans U.S. troops from taking part in UN peacekeeping operations unless the UN Security Council explicitly exempts them from possible prosecution.

[Randers]

12. To me, it's like they pleaded guilty before the war even started....n/t

[lovedems]

15. Or they knew they would be breaking all kinds of laws.

The chimps executive order also makes it impossible to prosecute "war profiteers". They had this planned out long before they got in office and they didn't want any of those pesky little laws to get in their way. What they couldn't get out treaty-wise, they covered with an executive order.

They covered ALL the bases to engage in illegal activity! I am sooooo disgusted.

[Gman]

19. Unsigning the ICC had me suspicious all along

I agree they knew from the beginning what they were going to do and how they were going to do it. All the dots are connecting very nicely right now.

However, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and even Gonzales all must to be prosecuted to the full extent of American law for war crimes. Failing the US prosecuting them, the international community must take action. If the international community fails then that means Sloboban Milosovic must be freed. That means the Nuremberg trials are all null and void and they owe the survivors of the executed compensation. Except in maybe the numbers of victims, how else are the Nazi war crimes any different than the Bush administration's war crimes? The Bush administration certainly has treated Iraqi prisoners no different than the Nazis treated Jews and others in WWII.

The world is at the most critical crossroads we've been at since the early 1930's. This kind of reckless disregard for international law cannot go unpunished.

[Kazak]

2. He'll leave forcibly...

if need be.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

5. I think New York's Olympic site bid for 2012

is history.

[DaveSZ]

7. Do you know for a fact he has a list of 60 countries he wants to invade?

I'd like to see a link or source on that.

:)

[Jacobin]

8. They still haven't arrested Kissinger

But I understand he has to be careful where he travels in Europe because of outstanding warrants.

Fucking nazi bastards. I hope Brazil doesn't take them this time around.

[DaveSZ]

11. What are the odds?

What are the odds that those responsible will be charged with war crimes?

[Jacobin]

20. Slim to none

Unfortunately.

:-(

[Atman]

10. Like Father like Son

Hopefully this time it will stick...

---

Bush War Crimes Tribunal

[leftofthedial]

13. They damn well better be.

I won't stop until they kill me or the bushgang are brought to justice.

[kentuck]

14. Not as concerned as they are about election in November...

I wish the UN would actually make the announcement that the possibility of war crimes will be pursued. Of course, it will never happen.

[drb]

16. Nah! We don't need trials! Here's my vision....

....the day after Kerry's inauguration, they're all arrested as "enemy combatants" and spirited away to secret prisons, never to be heard from again.

The next day, the Patriot Acts are declared null and void, so nobody else has to worry.

[bemildred]

17. Military courts, secret military courts. For all of them. nt

[Bandit]

18. So you would fight evil with evil

:shrug: I want to see a trial.