Recently, Desmond Tutu has refused to appear at conference in South Africa because Tony Blair will be present. Tutu has also made clear his feelings about George Bush and Tony Blair and their involvement in the Iraq war, calling for both to be brought before the ICC to face charges. Do you believe that either Bush or Blair will ever be brought before the courts? Do you believe they should be?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/stor … 57534404/1
Will they be? Nope. They're leaders of powerful western nations. The only people who get taken before the Hague are defeated dictators of fallen regimes.
Should they be? Well, I dunno. I don't think they used their power very responsibly or for the greater good, but I also don't think they could really be called "war criminals."
For Bush, you'd have to prove that he was aware of the atrocities committed by US troops at AbuGhraib and either approved of them or did not act to end them (I think omission of action might count as a crime here, but I'm not a lawyer). There's a lot of plausible deniability.
At the same time, I'm not sure what the standard for proving guilt is at the Hague. I'm used to "beyond a reasonable doubt" as the standard, so I imagine that it would be really hard to convict either Bush or Blair.
I agree, but I'm also thinking along the lines of detainees and Gitmo. It would be difficult for the Bush administration to deny that there was a fair bit of manoeuvring on their part, after all they ensured that Gitmo was outside the Geneva Convention prior to transferring detainees there. And Bush openly admits that if faced with the same situation he would authorise water boarding, again.
These two factors alone might be evidence of intent to commit war crimes. I know, there's no real consensus as to whether water boarding is considered torture *sighs* But, from what I understand, there's no legislation that states it isn't.
I will be really interesting to see what comes out of the UK Iraq inquiry.
Obama did not think through his first promise the day he took office and that is a shame
My understanding is that Gitmo still exists because he got not get enough bipartisan support to close it down and that there were also other issues; some prisoners deemed to dangerous to release but not enough (or no) evidence to convict them;prisoners that could be released but no other countries willing to accept them; prisoners who may have not received a fair trial in a civilian court because the way everyone feels (understandably) about 9/11.
It was an admirable stance for BO to take but unfortunately not a workable one.
Hey wouldn't it be a hoot if they got into office and found out....you know what there really are some BAD people down there. They aren't just random Arab goat herders rounded up and put there to satisfy the evil Bush. Most....most of them were in possession of weapons and were firing them at our troops.
Lesser beings would have just killed them and left their bodies lying in the sun. Have you ever seen how they live there? I don't have lots of those amenities.
JS calm down. You asked a question, I answered it. The perps of 9/11 should of course be prosecuted, but are you more interested in prosecuting the perps, or are you more interested in torturing Muslims? Where do you get the most....most of them were in possession of weapons and were firing them at our troops? Link? I'm really interested to know, because if that is the case then there is a case for bringing them to trial, not holding them indefinitely without trail. IF this is the case, then the argument that the US govt do not have any evidence is a complete fabrication, under both Bus and Obama.
What amenities, exactly, are you talking about?
If those people had weapons (and I believe they did) is because a war was going on in THEIR country. Do you really expect them to fight with their bare hands? Who was the invader here?
I am calm. I just get tired of the concept we are screwing with innocent people. You know better.
Sometimes we do screw with innocent people. Was the US diplomat guilty? He was screwed, he was trying, but there ARE Muslims and Arabs who try , too .For us to go on a tirade and blame a specific faith or nation is also unjustified, just like killing that man who was clearly trying to make a positive difference just because he was American is completely wrong.
You think they were unarmed Hollie?
This was combat. They lost the battle. There are consequences.
They were also invaded, JS. If the US were invaded, wouldn't you also pick up arms to defend your family? And remember, Iraq was not even responsible for 9/11. How frightening must that be, when your country is bombed and invaded for an atrocity you didn't even commit?
Okay I'll bite on this , No , they should never be brought up on charges , any more than president Obama should be , for contributing to and ignoring the reality of Americas economic downfall !
You know there are a lot of other nations who have no business complaining about torture or detainment or any of these other arguments as some of them basically invented the concepts.
It's been almost four years since George Bush was in office.
What's wrong with Barack Obama and Eric Holder? They are stalwarts of truth and justice are they not?
Why even the great Keith Olbermann intoned during the broadcast of the Obama inauguration as Bush was seen leaving"Officer.....arrest that man!"
The fact of the matter is they can't and won't do it for sketchy arguments of what is really criminal about the as well as the precedent you would set for the future. You don't want to make a crime out of something a politicina might want to use in the future....and don't think they wouldn't.
We know there are other countries that use torture, but we are supposed to be the ones to respect and enforce human rights.
The way prisoners have been treated and the use of "enhanced interrogation" is a black eye for democracy
If the United States desires the world to view it as a bastion of freedom and respect for the individual, we should lead by example!
I'm with Petra on that one, torture can never be acceptable, it's also counterproductive.
You must live in a cloud if you think clandestine intelligence isn't practiced by every free nation in the world , "torture " included. And No Obama didn't clean up anything that Bush didnt start , excepting hope and change ! There has to be a place between healthy diplomatic relations and all out war ,between any to nations -hence "spy's , intelligence and counter intel Those who can't understand this live in La La land !
Well then tell me, ahorseback, where does torture and diplomacy fit between healthy diplomatic relations and all out war? You must be living in a cloud if you honestly believe that someone who would never condone the use of torture, and I'm really interested to know why you feel that clandestine intelligence amounts to such, is not aware that it exists?
I believe they should face prosecution - something I had felt years ago. They certainly shouldn't feel proud of their actions but I doubt they have any remorse. I doubt it will happen unless there is a complete shift in thinking on this war of terror.
Those of you who cant understand the use of covert operations , and yes even toture are living in a rose colored fish bowl ! Imagine if you will, how many Hitlers , how many Bin Ladins or Noriega's have been eliminated from the earth . you live your lives and ideals far too sheltered from reality . Ask yourself ,under what circumstance would waterboarding be okay ? Only if it was to find YOUR kidnapped child ? Get real , theres more "Torture " right on the streets of L.A. every day . The difference between Bush and Obama : you wont hear about it under O's term ! Thats all,
by Leta S 9 years ago
C.I.A. interrogators under the Bush Admin. used waterboarding, the near-drowning technique that top Obama administration officials have described as illegal torture, 266 times on two key prisoners from Al Qaeda, FAR more than had been previously reported.The release of the numbers is likely to...
by Ralph Deeds 9 years ago
It appears to me that the torture issue, as Frank Rich observed in today's NY Times, is "bigger" than Obama. Rich's Op-ed provides a concise summary of where the issue currently stands. In my opinion, Obama had better get out from in front of the train! Here's a link to Frank Rich's...
by Steven Escareno 7 years ago
Okay, I know this probably isn't that big of a deal to some folks, but i thought i'd bring it up anyway. On the radio the other day, I was listening to two political analysts, and one of them still insists on labeling O'Bama a moron for how he's handled things from day one of his...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that President Obama can do a much better job as President? Do you contend that...
by Sychophantastic 22 months ago
If this private email server is such a big deal, worthy of prosecution and jail time, then shouldn't the FBI pursue charges against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney?http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/geor … 97373.htmlWhy was there no outrage about private emails servers when this happened?Are...
by Sooner28 5 years ago
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ma … CMP=twt_guFrom this article and others, it appears that not only the CIA, but also the U.S. military leadership was intimately involved in using torture on anyone unlucky enough to be captured, innocent or not. It's also likely Congress knew...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|