Blair and Bush to face prosecution at the Hague?

1. 61

   Hollie Thomasposted 12 years ago

   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

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      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.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         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.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So why does Gitmo still exist?

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Petra Vlahposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Obama did not think through his first promise the day he took office and that is a shame

               replyreport
            2. 61

               Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               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.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  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.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     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?

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Petra Vlahposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        JSChams
                        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?

                        replyreport
                     2. 61

                        JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        I am calm. I just get tired of the concept we are screwing with innocent people. You know better.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           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.

                           replyreport
                     3. 61

                        JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You think they were unarmed Hollie?
                        This was combat. They lost the battle. There are consequences.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           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?

                           replyreport
2. 0

   Will Apseposted 12 years ago

   It won't happen but it certainly would be just.

   replyreport
3. 0

   ahorsebackposted 12 years ago

   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  !

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Petra Vlahposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You mean Obama did not clean the mess fast enough?

      replyreport
4. 61

   JSChamsposted 12 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Petra Vlahposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      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

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Reality Bytesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         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!

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Petra Vlahposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That is right, and I wish that was the way US would have conducted itself, but it looks like the principle "Do as I say NOT as I DO" is what happens most often than not. It is precisely this type of hypocrisy that gets to me.

            replyreport
5. 61

   Hollie Thomasposted 12 years ago

   I'm with Petra on that one, torture can never be acceptable, it's also counterproductive.

   replyreport
6. 0

   ahorsebackposted 12 years ago

   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 !

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      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?

      replyreport
7. 87

   Jewelsposted 12 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
8. 0

   ahorsebackposted 12 years ago

   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,

   replyreport