Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why can't Iraq put US Troops on Trial?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:38 PM
Original message
Why can't Iraq put US Troops on Trial?
Why is that the Navy is investigating the Haditha Slayings instead of the Iraqi Justice Dept? Why can't Iraq try these troops?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Scoody Boo Donating Member (634 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. No SOFA Agreement with Iraq.
Troops can't be handed over for trial to another country without it. I am sure the Marines will get to the bottom of it and proper punishment will be dealt.

Also once the Marines are back in the US, they are Constitutionally protected from being extradidted to another country.

In other words, there is no way the Iraqis are going to get them under any circumstances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. So US Troops can only be investigated by
the US and Iraq Govt. cannot prosecute crimes commited in their own country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoody Boo Donating Member (634 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. That is true.
There is no mechanism for this to happen without a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). There has not been a government in place in Iraq to act on this so it all falls under the jurisdiction of the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. "sure Marines will get to the bottom of it & proper punishment dealt"
edit please. You left of the phrase "to all offenders under the rank of Major." I'm pretty sure they won't kick this up the chain of command to the people legally responsible under the Uniform Code for preventing atrocities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoody Boo Donating Member (634 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. If this was a company of Marines who did this...
then even their Battalion will not get out of this unscathed. While he may not face criminal charges, his career is pretty much done.

If it is one company of Marines who were not controlled by their Company Commander and snapped and other Marines in the battalion have never acted in this fashion then no one should face any charges above the level of the Company Commander.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. You'd be right if this thing "just happened this once" but I'm thinking...
...such things don't "just happen". It's a slow stress build up and it's a fairly monumental breakdown of military discipline. Our military is actually pretty good about putting in safeguards against such events--better than most in the world. When something this big goes on, something big broke in the system. If it was one family executed, I'd buy it. We're talking about as many as 24 murders. That's not a lieutenant's error. That's a Colonel or a General's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. US troops are exempt from war crime trials. Bush did that several yrs ago.
Finally, an example of Bush planning ahead for an unpleasant contingency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Servicemembers%27_Protection_Act
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoody Boo Donating Member (634 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. SOFA Agreements have been around since the Korean War...
so it was not Bush's idea. As far as being a party to an International Court, I am glad it did not go through. Handing over any troop or official for trial would be unconstitutional and to me, our Constitution matters more than any international agreement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. If the ICC's authority was ratified by the US, it would be Constitutional
As treaties signed by the US government carry the weight of Constitutional law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoody Boo Donating Member (634 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. In which case...
I am even more glad we had no part of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I was more neutral with respect to the ICC
Edited on Wed May-31-06 06:12 PM by Selatius
I wouldn't expect even the US should be exempt from having its leaders tried in the Hague for war crimes and crimes against humanity. If the US government did commit crimes, there have to be consequences, and I'd sign onto the ICC if the punishment given in the US courts was nothing more than a slap on the wrist like Lt. Calley's case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. Even contractors are exempt from law enforcement and lawsuits. The Shrub
signed an executive order before invading Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
13. Paul Bremer exempted US troops and contractors from
Iraqi law concerning anything they do during their official duties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The question remains.
Is Iraq once again a Sovereign Nation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Officially, Iraq is a sovereign country, but practically, it's an occupied
country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
16. Because they are an occupied country and we are a fascist country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
17. The Iraqis might want to prosecute the guys who sent the butchers.
Couldn't have that, you know. Bad PR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terran1212 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
18. Same reason they can't put Bush and Blair on trial
And I'm sure if you took any Iraqi poll, the majority of respodents would call for something like that too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave502d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
19. I don't think anyone would like to see that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC