Should the head of state be held accountable for the consequences of their decisions once retired?
Specifically I'm referring to Bush and Blair with this post. It seems to me that when in power you can make the most terrible and misguided decisions but as soon as you either retire or lose an eledction you can wash your hands of the entire affair. In Tony Blair's new book he dismisses the fact that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq by suggesting Saddam had enough desire for us to belive they were there! This is pitiful stuff. He knew he was wrong, but it's not a crime because he was head of state. And politicans get away with theiving expenses money from the tax payer too!
While I'd love to say yes they should hold responsibility I don't think I can. Mainly because we the people voted them in. We allowed certain people to represent us and in so doing put part of the blame on ourselves. I will not say i agreed or agree with all decisions made by those we elect, but the truth of the matter is we did elect them. Now crimes and such that they do before during or after their running time, those they most definitely must pay for. I don't even know if what I said makes sense, but that's what i believe.
Of course all roads points toward the one that did the deed.You can't blame it on the rain.
Why not include Carter, Clinton, Obama, also -- all the way back to and including Abraham Lincoln. The only question I have is: lynching or firing squad?
http://hubpages.com/hub/america-what-we … the-answer
To do as this question suggests would require a constitutional amendment because officials are not liable per se while in office. And that's actually a good provision because otherwise every sewer trout lawyer in the world would be standing in line to sue every single government official and government would simply cease functioning at all. Some would suggest that's not a bad idea....then again, so does every drunk at every corner bar
Every head of state has done things he should be held accountable for. Clinton (Lewinsky), Obama (farce of a healthcare bill), Reagan (Iran-Contra), Nixon (Watergate), Thatcher (Falkand Islands), and so on and so forth.
It's a sort of immunity that comes with the responsibility of such a post. This isn't anything new so I am not sure why this is still an issue.
The weight of the responsibility gives them a sort of privilege.
I am not sure because its a "political post". However, in the case of Bush and Blair, they should be held accountable because it was proven time and again Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, and yet they went ahead with it, and blown the guy into smithreens ignoring the rest of the world. Meanwhile there is "regime change" and chaos looms over the country, mayhem, murder sectarian strife continues, while Bush and Blair rehabilitated as peace makers--and Blair showered as a man of peace. Ultimate hipocracy maybe. The war was a huge mistake, at a huge expense, yes they must be brought to justice, because in the end they became just like Saddam Hussein.
by Paul Swendson 3 years ago
And if so, how?
by Credence2 3 years ago
Ted Cruz and much of the Conservative community have been sore losers, after 2 recent Supreme Court Decisions "threw them under the bus". See brief article below:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/2 … lp00000592Accusing the court of judicial activism, he says that he believes...
by Daffy Duck 7 years ago
Should politicians be held to the promises they make?They make some promises with the intention of doing what they say. ButPoliticians make some promises with no inclination of ever following through. Should they be held accountable for what they say they will do or is it just how...
by Kristen Burns-Darling 3 years ago
Should President Obama be held accountable for derogatory comments of senior white house officials?In an article published 10/28/2014, Jeffery Goldberg quoted two unnamed senior white house officials as having called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, "chickenshit', Should...
by countrywomen 9 years ago
We were just following the news recently where Jon Stewart accused Jim Kramer (and others in the media) for there part in the 401k losses. Both myself and to a great extent my husband's 401k was lost. Recently when we saw the AIG top executives giving bonuses to themselves from our hard...
by Flightkeeper 8 years ago
Radical leftist James Lee became a militant environmentalist after seeing Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, and has held three people hostage when he stormed the lobby of the building where Discovery Channel has their offices. He made demands that people stop having children. Obviously...
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.|