A provocative headline, I know, perhaps needlessly so, but it remains one of those hidden secrets in Washington that a Democratic Justice Department is going to be very interested in figuring out whether there's a case to be made that senior Bush Administration officials were guilty of war crimes. Stories like these from ABC News -- Top Bush Advisors Approved 'Enhanced Interrogation' -- will be as relevant a year from now as they are right now, perhaps even more so.
« McCain Leaves Open An Olympic Boycott | Main | Podcast: Ambinder and Douthat On Veepstakes And Petraeus » War Crimes09 Apr 2008 07:11 pm Comments (80)
How does that follow? I mean, how does saying "Official A committed war crimes. Here is the evidence." inevitably lead to "Let's investigate every previous administration, despite there being no suggestion of international criminality?" 
Nothing will come of it, because, as indicated above, some very uncomfortable and inconvenient information about actions taken during the Clinton years will undoubtedly be dragged into the daylight as well. Do y'all really think Hillary and Bubba would let such material come out without a fight? Then again, I can't think of a better recipe for civil strife than a bone-headed Donk attempt to retroactively impeach President Bush after he's left office. Oh yeah, that'll really "unite" the country and push along Prince Charming's agenda, won't it? If the Donks really want to pull this kind of a stunt, all I can say is "Stupidity, thy true name is Obama."
information about actions taken during the Clinton years will undoubtedly be dragged into the daylight No, they sure wouldn't want people digging into their bidness. Ahem. Did you sleep through the 90s? Anyway, it's interesting the defense isn't that war crimes weren't committed; it's that we should just let sleeping dogs lie.
I wish they would, but it would shock me if they do. Our home-grown war criminals do indeed need to be subject to the same careful and honest jurisprudence -- and they are entitled to the same aggressive defense -- that were accorded to the Nuremberg defendants. Then, if found guilty, they should serve time, just as their predecessors did.
You liberal folks are perhaps so carried away with hubris that you have forgotten the likelihood that there will be another Republican administration in the future. If Prez. Obama tries to toss Cheney to the wolves...rest assured the GOP will be seeking payback. Perhaps for the disastrous intervention in Darfur, and the Massacre at Khartoum? [Cue plaintive whine] How could anyone prosecute Obama? He is a saint! This is a MoveOn.org fantasy. Won't happen. As Obama knows very well...he is a child of Chicago Rules, after all...payback's a bitch.
Blanket pardons for numerous Bushies -- and Bush's resignation in the waning hours of his term, so that Cheney can pardon him --will be the big story of January 2009.
A hypothetical: AttyGen Edwards investigates. It is found that senior Bush Administration officials discussed in detail and approved the enhanced interrogations. The investigation also reveals that information from KSM and the other (four?) waterboarded detainees led materially to the prevention of several, or even one, attack on the mainland.
Payback? Really? Clinton walked away from further pursuing Iran Contra and he was paid back w/ bs impeachment anyway. If I'm HIllary or Obama I'm using getting to the bottom of this rotten kettle of fish as a campaign promise. People want to know secrets. Promise them they'll be revealed.
Isn't this exactly what happened when Bill Clinton entered the White House? As reported by Bob Parry: Democratic sources say Clinton heeded personal appeals from the elder Bush and other top Republicans to close the books on the so-called “Iraqgate” investigation – as well as probes into secret Reagan-Bush dealings with Iran – soon after the Democrat defeated Bush in the 1992 election. If we can't get the Democrats to investigate the sweetheart deals and the billions of dollars that have gone missing in Iraq, why do we think Democrats would hold these war criminals to account? Has the media thought to ask the candidates what their plans are for investigating the past eight years? Other than Fred Thompson who said that if he won the Republican nomination, he wouldn't investigate anything that happened during Bush's administration, I haven't heard a word from any of the others on the subject.
I don't think they'll follow through, but I really, really wish they would. Just consider this for a moment: if the situations were reversed in terms of Dem/Repub, does anyone doubt for even a *second* that the Republicans would think twice about prosecuting? It's okay to impeach over a bj, but not over actual war crimes? Really?
Good! And don't forget the war crime of waging pre-emptive war. God Bless America, and may she return soon.
Its an interesting question. Internationally, as a new coming Dem. Pres. you would want to be able to answer your allies and pseudo-allies about the steps you are going to take to keep the sole remaining superpower a itsy bit further away from the edge of global empire informed by fascism. But as a practical domestic matter you aren't going to have much luck making examples in a polarized electorate (man, isn't that weird? Its like trying to figure out why the universe looks SOOO flat) that has recently demonstrated powerfully the propensity for insta-politi-deification. So what should happen is: A formal statement that for the good of the country, no effort will be brought against the war criminals. However, no effort will be exerted to prevent other members of the international community from exacting justice.
Tryggth, Yours is a pragmatic prognostication. Perhaps we could also enter into the War Crimes Tribual our allies are in - but we are not. This action would show our true to commitment to stop the crimes, and gain back some of that lost credibility, lower the "payback" ratio that our captured troops would suffer as a result of this administration's crimes.
Tryggth, Yours is a pragmatic prognostication. Perhaps we could also enter into the War Crimes Tribual our allies are in - but we are not. This action would show our true to commitment to stop the crimes, gain back some of that lost credibility, and lower the "payback" ratio that our captured troops would suffer as a result of this administration's crimes.
Look at what's happened in the past year. Had the Republican Party taken over Congress as the Dems just did and a Democratic president and vice president had committed the kinds of crimes of omission and commission committed by the Bush Administration, they would have made the Congress look like a war zone. They, and their sycophants in right-wing talk radio, would have shut the Congress down until they had show trial and hung Democrats from the street signs in D.C. Hey, they impeached Clinton for lying about a sexual affair. The Bush Administration has lied us into the biggest disaster in modern American history not to mention crimes too innumerable to list. The Democrats, unfortunately, have rolled over and played dead when confronted by the abstinence and stonewalling of this administration. Where are they going to find the cojones to mount a war crimes trial - no matter how well deserved???
We have to investigate and imprison these fucking pigs.
What a bunch of dolts! Just try and you will see a second civil war, only since you don't believe in gun ownership, you will get your clocks clean. Americans have been pretty forgiving about your idiotic, nonsensical "anti-war" protests and support for people who have and will kill their countrymen, but attempt to prosecute an American president for trying to protect his citizens and you will wish you had just continued hitting the bong in your basements. Good luck with your delusional fantasies.
LogicalSC: 'second civil war'? Bring it on. Bush and his cronies deserve to rot in jail for their numerous violations of the Constitution and their flaunting of the Geneva Conventions. I'd be willing to fight to see justice done to them. If YOU'RE willing to fight to protect the criminal sitting in the Oval Office right now, that's fine and dandy. I'll be loading my shotgun (I'm a Texas Democrat).
This is bigger than Watergate because the rush to Bush's pre-emptive war is bigger than Watergate. But if there's another attack on the country it will all go away because Bush etal. have made certain that declaring martial law will be as easy as flying planes into buildings. Why do you think Cheney wants the taxpayer to pay for his undeserved secret service protection after he leaves office? These men know their own guilt. They've also laid plans for the loose ends. This makes me sick to my stomach.
Absolutely beautiful: "God Bless America, and may she return soon."
Here's a little historical perspective on the Bush presidency that is pertinent to this discussion. Scott Horton, writing in Harpers, has posted a poll of American historians who have already formed strong opinions of the Bush presidency: "Yes. History News Network’s poll of 109 historians found that 61 percent of them rank Bush as “worst ever” among U.S. presidents.. . . 96 percent of the respondents place the Bush presidency in the bottom tier of American presidencies. And was his presidency . . a success or failure? On that score the numbers are still more resounding: 98 percent label it a "failure'." Here are a few quotes from the historians: “No individual president can compare to the second Bush,” wrote one. “Glib, contemptuous, ignorant, incurious, a dupe of anyone who humors his deluded belief in his heroic self, he has bankrupted the country with his disastrous war and his tax breaks for the rich, trampled on the Bill of Rights, appointed foxes in every henhouse, compounded the terrorist threat, turned a blind eye to torture and corruption and a looming ecological disaster, and squandered the rest of the world’s goodwill. In short, no other president’s faults have had so deleterious an effect on not only the country but the world at large.” “With his unprovoked and disastrous war of aggression in Iraq and his monstrous deficits, Bush has set this country on a course that will take decades to correct,” said another historian. “When future historians look back to identify the moment at which the United States began to lose its position of world leadership, they will point—rightly—to the Bush presidency. Thanks to his policies, it is now easy to see America losing out to its competitors in any number of areas: China is rapidly becoming the manufacturing powerhouse of the next century, India the high tech and services leader, and Europe the region with the best quality of life.” And, we can't even find the political will to impeach this criminal piece of shit let alone do a decent job of investigating his crimes. I think the historians are going to have a similarly dim view of the American public that put up with this scumbag.
Unlike LogicalSC, I believe in the Rule Of Law and the Constitution of the United States. The violators of our system of governance must be prosecuted, regardless of their former position. No one is above the Law, or America is already a shriveled remnant of what was once a great country. I'm sure the industrial grade shredding trucks are getting used by the current administration 24/7/365 in an effort to sanitize government records. And the last minute blanket pardons, a Bush Family tradition, are assured. My hopes for a thorough public exposure of the disaster that has befallen our country and the world since Little W was appointed by the Supreme Court are for naught. LogicalSC and his ilk are ample evidence that our education system is manufacturing Dittoehads, not responsible citizens. And, by the way LogicalSC, I, and many others like me, such as Jim Webb and Jon Tester, take our 2nd Amendment Rights, to heart. We served our time in the war of our youth, and find your words on right wing patriotism laughable.
The American people didn't support a pardon for Libby, and he wasn't convicted of something as reprehensible as war crimes. So, I don't think the political context would prevent war crimes prosecutions. But a set of Presidential pardons as Bush leaves office might.
I marvel at the vindictiveness and hatred in these comments. So how long will it be before you guys strap on bomb vests with bags full of nails to kill us war criminals who support the mission in Iraq? Bring the troops home so we can spit on them, right?
While I'm an Obama supporter, I think this would be a great example of "Change" - which is in danger of becoming a cliche like "Freedom", by the way. I don't think it's something he'll pursue, though. Perhaps he wouldn't have the political capital to do this until a second term - surely the prosecution of this would be extraordinarily divisive - but it needs to be done. I think the public would be more supportive of it than the prosecution of Bill Clinton. Letting sleeping dogs lie would be an unfortunate path to take. As far as the payback theme goes, this is why Hillary couldn't legitimately pursue something like this. It would be perceived as such for what happened to her husband. Something that hasn't been mentioned - although this shouldn't be the primary reason that it's pursued - is that this would go a LOOOOOOOONG way towards reconciling and repairing our relations with the rest of the world, and could probably turn into much more active UN and NATO assistance in regards to helping to repair Iraq and in finishing the job in Afghanistan. There's no way around it being perceived as a political stunt, but that shouldn't be why Democrats avoid bringing the John Yoos of the world to answer for their crimes against the Constitution.
Major Hughes - First, are you really a major? I doubt that, because most of the majors I know are pretty smart guys who would realize that the people implied in the comments advocating the prosecution of war criminals are elected politicians and not military members. Now, if American troops were engaging in clearly illegal activity, they should answer for that as well. Something a major in the military would be well aware of. As a side note, a major in the military would know to not to go throwing around their rank in a political argument. Nevertheless, it's nice straw-man argument you make! To propose that people hate the troops - that's a good one, it never fails.
Ambinder should have followed this post with: "Full disclosure: I know jack about the law generally, and even less about the law governing war, and I like making stuff up."
Since Obama's camp is full of far leftists I'm guessing yes. The Democrats are in to criminalizing policy differences so this would be just another step in that direction. However, the situation would not remain static. If, as predicted when we quickly withdraw from Iraq, Iraq becomes a terrorist haven and there is another terrorist attack on the US, the Obamas will look foolish and weak prosecuting the effective national security types. This would be the end of the Democrats for generations. So, let's hope they do this.
I can only hope that someone wants to get to the truth. So many laws have been broken in the last 4 administrations but the stories always seem to just go away. Does anyone involved in government and public policy actually want to get to the truth? I would love it, I would be so proud of this country if someone would just follow all the facts where they lead......regardles of where they lead. It would go a long way toward repairing all the damage that's been done.
"LogicalSC: 'second civil war'? Bring it on." Shotgun? Oooooh, scary. Delusional is the right word for you folks. But hey, there's hope. If you believe ABC News, 4 out of 5 soldiers in Iraq are voting Democrat (snicker chortle guffaw.)
Kathryn says:Torture is not a policy difference. Kathryn says:That's good because it's going to take generations for our children and their children's children to repay all the debt for this money President Bush is borrowing to run his Credit Card war. Kathryn says:Aside of that 9/11 thing and those Anthrax attacks and Osama bin Ladin still Dead or Alive somewhere, the Bush Administration has indeed been teh Awesome at effective national security type things. People like Osama bin Ladin who want to cripple and destroy America are no match for this Administration.
"Torture is not a policy difference." No, but apparently to you dimwits "torture" is what YOU say it is.
It is way too late in the day for the potential war criminals to try to hide behind the military. When the Abu Ghraib pictures came out, they protected themselves by blaming members of the military for the results of their policies, and indeed advocated punitive action against those members of the military. So, they would have no ability to turn around and now claim that holding them responsible as well would somehow be anti-military. Incidentally, any war crimes prosecutions would have to be based on existing criminal law at the time those acts were committed, because otherwise the defendants would have a valid ex post facto argument. In that sense, it would not be possible to retroactively "criminalize" acts that were not already criminal at the time and then to prosecute people for those acts. But there was indeed a large body of law on war crimes that was established prior to the Bush Administration taking office, and that would be the basis for any prosecutions. As for the political viability of all this, I again note that they tried to make out Libby as just a political prisoner as well, and the American people didn't buy it. The bottomline is that the American people don't really care all that much if someone else is going to benefit politically from the successful prosecution of a political official, as long as they are convinced that this political official did in fact commit the crime for which he or she was prosecuted and convicted.
Provocative? It should have said "torture". That'd be more accurate. They're all criminals. What they authorized is against US and international law that we're bound by the Constitution to follow.
Get the ropes ready !! Hand out the bullets to the firing squad !! the War Criminals in the current administration are finally going to pay for 7+ years of War Crimes !! yahoooooooooooooooooooo !!!!!!!! and a big f*** you to all of the ignorant repukes and reich wingers posting here !!! you good little germans deserve what the War Criminals are going to get !!!
Hey, according to the people in this administration, what they did/are doing is all legal, right? If it is legal, what do they have to hide? They should not have any problem/fear of justifying their actions and behavior at the Hague. Just make public all of the documents that are not truly relevant to national security and let the scales of justice fall where they may. Thousands have died based on their words, the least they can do is convice us all that there was merit behind their actions. It was all legal, right??? Also, I feel a minor correction is in order: "Torture is not a policy difference." No, but apparently to you dimwits "torture" is what YOU say it is.
You misspelled a word in your response, torture is what YOO says it is.
Torture is torture. Laws are laws. If they don't apply to everyone then they might as well apply to no one. If the Democrats refuse to prosecute then we need to force the situation. Form a new party of the left wing of the Democratic party. After all, the Republican party has been taken over by it's most far right wing elements. Using the MSM, which they own, to try to convince the electorate that their policies are reasonable. The MSM has taken to telling a lot of outright lies or omitting inconvenient facts lately as the results of these policies have become difficult to defend. I won't say this is new and has never happened before but if we let if go unchallenged, we will become a part of it. The blood will be on all of our hands, not just those that support these simplistic, ignorant policies.
No, but apparently to you dimwits "torture" is what YOU say it is. Actually, the same acts that the Bush administration and right-wing apologists call "enhanced interrogation techniques" were prosecuted as war crimes by the U.S. in Nuremberg. The Military Code of Conduct says they're torture too. So does the Geneva Convention. So does the U.N. But hey, Rush is on your side. It's really the right-wing-nuts that suddenly want to change the definition of torture accepted for about the last 100 years. Your definition? Anything the U.S. does is fine, anything the other guy does it torture. That's pretty much what Yoo's justification said.
I don't think torture is the only potential felony worth investigating. In my mind this administration has shown flagrant disregard for the Fourth amendment. This is just as bad as the torture in my opinion given that it was potentially a crime against every american citizen... (emphasis added) "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
No formal or complicated investigation is needed. We can just waterboard Rummy, Condi, Feith, Cheney and the rest, and get any information we want, . . right? After all, it's not torture, and, according to the administration, it works. We already have the precedent - now, we only need the president's ignorant ass on the board, and all will be revealed.
Just try and you will see a second civil war, only since you don't believe in gun ownership, you will get your clocks clean. Pretty accurate. And if the ACLU Jews and other radicals try to trundle hundreds of our soldiers and officials into a 2nd Nuremburg Trial for defending us against terrorists, there will be a nation-wide firestorm, possible revolt by the US military. Texas Democrat, good luck with your shotgun and ability of others to withstand against an armed citizenry that is 85% inclined to kill people that would hand over our guys to Jewish justice. You don't apply peacetime law to wartime. If you do and cost American lives, those who are left after power is taken from them will stand trial themselves for treason.
And if the ACLU Jews and other radicals try to trundle hundreds of our soldiers and officials into a 2nd Nuremburg Trial for defending us against terrorists, there will be a nation-wide firestorm, possible revolt by the US military. We saw the "firestorm" that occurred when the Bush administration toasted the low-level soldiers at Abu Ghraib and let virtually every office off the hook. Where were all you macho, patriotic right-wingers then? Probably drinkin' cheap beer while watchin' Faux News and yellin' at their TV's. Yeah. That showed 'em. All tremble at the right-wing battle cry! "I am dumb as a stump. HEAR ME ROAR!"
I guess Chris Ford and the guy he parroted are writing from Baghdad. I'm sure of it. They are REAL patriots, not those stay-at-home-wannabe-killers-without-guts, draft-dodging conservatives, right?
"ACLU Jews?" Say no more. You've already identified (and indicted) yourself.
Congressional hearings or "war crimes" trials will only devolve into political theater of the worst sort. President Bush and all of his top administration officials have been consulting with lawyers every step of the way, with an eye towards building legal defenses for all their actions - this is SOP. You can be certain they have already found loop-holes and interpretations sufficient to keep everyone on the sunny side of the jail doors, and contributions from deep-pockets political allies will assure that nobody is harmed financially. The exercise would prove to be very unfulfilling for everyone involved - except for the lawyers of course. The real danger in this scenario is found in precedent. Crack your history books folks and look at what happens to nations that have indulged in this sort of vindictive politics: they regress into totalitarianism because the populace will at some point get fed-up with the destructive bickering and turn to a strongman to restore order. There’s really only one endgame possible if we go down this path - the U.S. becomes the world's biggest banana republic. Think the Patriot Act violates your civil rights? You haven't seen anything yet. Just keep it up.
We should have a rule in this country: You can't send people to war, or advocate such unless you have experienced it yourself. Having volunteered for the war of my generation in 1967, (and learned better), I would welcome any kind of "discussion" with anyone who needs a gun to be equal to the rest of us. I find that most of the big mouths in blogs and chatrooms are the stay-at-home kind of "patriot", feeling guilty for their cowardice or selfishness, and overcompensating by having someone else pay the price for their lack of character. Let's get a place in Texas to put these pretend heroes, and arm them all, and let them kill each other for peace.
This idea is either: (a) a bunch of red meat--er, well, fresh tofu--for the left-wing nutroot vote (much as Tancredo's rantings are red meat for the right-wing nutroots); or (b) a case of some Democrats being too stupid to understand what would come next. At best: the Democrats lose both houses in the 2010 elections, and the Democrat President either (a) trims his/her sails to match the new tone (read: throws the Attorney General and his/her flying monkeys to the wolves, possibly with a dubious FBI investigation to keep them busy through the 2012 election cycle) or (b) loses the 2012 election in a 1984-style landslide. At worst: the American Pinochet appears, and Democrats and their fellow travelers "disappear" by the millions. Yes, the second scenario can happen here. All you need to do is to convince Republicans and/or US military personnel that doing so is a matter of personal survival.
Paul M. says:You're right in that any war crimes trials would be best conducted in an international court setting like the Hague, and not in the US Congress else it would be derided as political payback by the media elites like Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly etc. That's not to say Congress has no role in investigating the many other alleged crimes of this Bush Administration, but Congressional trails and hearings will not be enough to remove the stains upon America's reputation of the last seven years. Only a fair, international tribunal will have any hope to accomplish that. Paul M. says:I think you're right and that's why the Bush Administrations is pushing so hard for that retroactive immunity for the telecoms. They want to try and close every last door to investigating their actions. Paul M. says:Justice is its own reward. Paul M. says:Yes, if the last seven years are allowed to stand as precedent, we'll be torturing Americans here at home before long. Paul M. says:We're heading there already. Our treasury is bankrupted and yet we keep borrowing more and more money leaving nothing but bills and sheer disgrace for future Americans. Paul M. says:Muster your courage. Americans must not fear the truth.
There is a bigger concern here than just the prosecution of an illegal war, a crime against humanity: It is the wholesale accdeptance of killing as an acceptable path to maturity. Here is a letter that no newspaper would print: Where is the pride in surrendering life’s most important decisions to others? Where is the honor in killing on command?
It's OK because they are Republicans! One thing being a Republican means is that there is never any punishment for committing crimes. Dem Gov Spitzer hires prostitutes and he is forced to resign. GOP Vitter hires prostitutes and receives a standing ovation from Congress for it. Dem President makes $50K on land deal and millions of dollars are spent on investigations. GOP president baltantly and knowingly lies to the world so he can start two illegal and immoral wars in order to freely slaughter women and children and kill thousands of US Servicemen for fun, and he is praised by the voters! KBR sets up rape rooms for Iraq workers and the DoJ refuses to investigate. But the DoJ happily investigates and prosecutes Dems in power, like former AL Gov Siegelman, solely because they are in the Democratic Party. And the Republicans that post here seem to be fully supportive of that kind of America, where there is no accountability for Republicans, only Democrats are persecuted.
This is the 4th time in a week that I have heard war crimes (or criminals) publically applied to the Bush administration. Hundreds of thousands of us have been saying it privately for years, but finally the understanding of the overt criminality of the last 7 years has surfaced in the pundit class. Now can we impeach them?
After re-reading some of the comments I have come to realize that the attitude of the Republicans that post here is this: "If anyone tries to uphold the RULE of LAW or uphold the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, then these people will be attacked and killed, with the blessing of Dear Leader Bush" The US is in a state of war solely because Acting-President Bush Decreed it to be so. There is NO basis in the law for a state war existing now. The US is NOT AT WAR, we are illegally occupying Iraq and aiding the Iran-backed leadership there in slaughtering women and children!!! There is NO WARTIME justification for suspending the Rule of Law or the Constitution! You Republicans are so stupid, because you listen to Rush and Fox 'News' which constantly and blatantly lie to you. And now you fantasize about killing me and my children because we don't believe the lies that you do? How Un-American can you get?
It sickens me that the conservative right is so grossly self-interested and immoral that they are willing to attack the left for trying to ensure the rule of law. It also sickens me that the left can be so disgustingly cowardly that they would allow political expediency to interfere with the application of justice. GWB ordered at least three people tortured. Administration and CIA officials have admitted as much, although they would prefer we used the phrase 'aggressively interrogated.' Unfortunately for them, waterboarding has been explicitly classified as torture under domestic and international law for decades, if not centuries. The USA has successfully concluded war crime prosecutions against Japanese soldiers who waterboarded American servicemen during WWII. The conservative response to this charge is that he was acting in the national security interests of the country. Well, that's fine. I disagree vehemently, but he can argue that at his trial. Given the make-up of the current Supreme Court, he may well be successful. But to NOT prosecute him (when he has essentially admitted in public that he has committed multiple felonies) because the public might get the impression that Democrats are being vindictive, is truly pathetic. The correct (and legal) course of action for GWB, would have been for him to convince Congress that torture was necessary to the national defense and have them affirm that legislatively. He didn't do that because he knew that either, A) it was NOT, in fact, necessary, or, B) that even if it were necessary, he would not be able to convince Congress of that fact. Instead, he made the broadest possible claim of executive privilege in the knowledge that he would probably never be called to account. For the record, I am a registered independent and have absolutely no partisan interest in this issue. Right now, both sides turn my stomach. My sole concern is maintaining the integrity of the Republic. To NOT prosecute an admitted war criminal because it is politically inconvenient is a terrible precedent, and, in my opinion, just about the worst thing we could do to undermine the rule of law.
Nick is right. We have lost our country to authoritarian Fascists, and most americans are too stupid to care, as long as they have Fox sleaze to watch on TV and foreigners to kill for profit.
we are illegally occupying Iraq It is painfully obvious that you do not understand the definition of "occupation." You are stating that the US government exercises sovereignty over Iraq. It doesn't. The Iraqi government--duly elected by Iraqi voters--does. If the Iraqi government tells us to leave, and we do not, then our presence becomes occupation. If the Iraqi government tells us to leave, we will most likely do so. Words have specific meanings. Kindly learn them.
Cobalt Shiva is wrong. Shiva, if you think that the US military is not an occupation force, you must be listening to Limbaugh or Cheney, or others of those whose character flaws and greed got us into this, the biggest debacle in the history of the United States. The people of Iraq have voiced many times their requests for us to get out. And it wasn't even close. The assertion that it didn't come from our stooges in their "government" is ridiculous. Who are you going to believe, our stooges or the people of Iraq? It is painfully obvious that you might have been one of those who thought that invading a sovereign nation to steal its natural resources was a good idea. Well?
The people of Iraq have voiced many times their requests for us to get out. How, exactly did they do this? And if you say "through this opinion poll blah blah blah," you lose the argument automatically. That's because (a) a properly worded poll can get people to support banning hydrogen hydroxide and (b) because Iraqis--due to the last few decades of their history--aren't quite up to the level of answering nosy political questions from strangers with the sort of aplomb we've come to have in America. And it wasn't even close. They elected a government that asked for US troops to leave? Oh, wait, they didn't. The assertion that it didn't come from our stooges in their "government" is ridiculous. If we did truly "occupy" Iraq, then the benchmarks that Democrats whine about the Iraqi government not meeting would be immaterial--we would simply put something in place, declare the benchmark "closed," and that would be that. Instead, the Iraqi Parliament is stuck in a do-nothing-or-at-least-not-much-of-anything-useful mode, much like our own Congress has been for much of its history. Who are you going to believe, our stooges or the people of Iraq? Who apppointed you the One True Person of Spoke for the People of Iraq? It is painfully obvious that you might have been one of those who thought that invading a sovereign nation to steal its natural resources was a good idea. And it even claims to be able to read my mind from just a few Internet postings . . . I'm so impressed.
"If we did truly "occupy" Iraq, then the benchmarks that Democrats whine about the Iraqi government not meeting would be immaterial--we would simply put something in place, declare the benchmark "closed," and that would be that." How astute of you to notice. But in fact, we disregarded the benchmarks altogether, since none were met. Our military runs on dynamic action. It was built and trained to attack and take ground, not to hold cities as a police force - the two orientations are completely different. So just ask any soldier or Marine in Iraq if he's an occupying force or not. Whether polls of the people of Iraq or pronouncements of the "government" are more valid is just a deviation from the topic of the Bush administration's criminal use of torture. Are you going to defend tourture? Do you think we can brutalize people without paying for it in the long term?
Are you going to defend tourture? Do you think we can brutalize people without paying for it in the long term? We have "brutalized" and "tortured" exactly three people, all of them senior leaders in the al-Qaeda organization. I am reasonably satisfied that we don't do it for jollies, and I really don't give an airborne fornication at a rolling doughnut about the sensitivities of senior al-Qaeda leaders. BTW, I have been "tortured" by the US government--it's called Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape School. (Waterboarding is part of the curriculum.) That you choose to call it "torture" is utterly meaningless to me. It isn't. It is extremely unpleasant, but there are far worse things that can be done to a person.
Cobalt Shiva says: "We have "brutalized" and "tortured" exactly three people..."
"We have "brutalized" and "tortured" exactly three people, all of them senior leaders in the al-Qaeda organization. " Oh, yes, I believe you!! All those poor suckers in Guantanamo are on a picnic. The Iraqi general officer who was "interrogated" by putting him in a sleeping bag and smothered to death wasn't tortured - he asked for it. But those tortured by our people aren't the only problem: In one of my Vet groups we had an interrogator from one of Dubya's wars, I won't say which one, but he will never be anything like the whole person he was. Brutalizing people just makes you a brute. If you're a caring human being, that's hard to live with. And if you think waterboarding was no big deal, let me do it to you.
If cobalt has been through SERE then he might be military or former military, like me. I have to ask: How do you like how Bush and the right-wingers have "supported" our troops by sending them nedlessly on a fool's errand for his political benefit? Is that cool? It must be neat to take orders from a draft-dodging frat boy, living in a Hellhole for the mistake of a complete idiot. Yup, and he's gonna leave it all in good shape, those Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine organizations. Just like he did for our economy and environment, infrastructure, and international reputation. You voted for him, didn't you?
I guess answering that last question would have violated the Fifth Amendment of Mr Cobalt, so I'll bring up another possible outcome of the Administration's criminal behavior. The Military Commissions Act was passed mainly to give legal cover for the crimes committed by the administration, but in it is the flaw that may bedevil the neocons and their lackeys. Because it gives immunity for those crimes, it makes it possible for international organizations to petition the International Criminal Court for arrest warrants, should any of the Bush crowd dare to travel overseas. It was how they got Pinochet, and one brutal killer is like another. The world already hates this crowd for what they have done to our country and others. They might do our work for us, without the cowardly Democrats.
If cobalt has been through SERE then he might be military or former military, like me. I'm impressed! You figured that out unassisted! How do you like how Bush and the right-wingers have "supported" our troops by sending them nedlessly on a fool's errand for his political benefit? Let me know when he actually gets any. Now I'm not so impressed. You voted for him, didn't you? Yes, I did.
I think they all need to face a judge and jury for destructing the constitution and bill of rights,and all the secret things in the background without going through congress as, even though they don't represent us like they should, they should.
I think they all need to face a judge and jury for destructing the constitution and bill of rights,and all the secret things in the background without going through congress as, even though they don't represent us like they should, they should.
And if you think waterboarding was no big deal, let me do it to you. I didn't describe it as "no big deal." I merely do not view it as torture. But I find it fascinating that someone who claims to be so opposed to torture and to be so concerned about the human rights of senior terrorists expressing such a strong desire to use what he describes as torture on a political opponent. Behold the mind of the true believer. He knows that his enemies wish him evil; after all, he wishes them evil as well.
One of the hardest things I ever did was to face up to the fact that by volunteering for the Killing Machine, I was complicit in great crimes. Like now, we were not killing for peace, freedom, or any of that patriotic pap so favored by the gullible like me, but for someone's mistake, and their inability to admit it. Once started, the war had too much momentum to stop it, too much money was being made, too many people got powerful, others got their kicks with the high daily adrenaline that left them feeling unfulfilled by everything else - so they went back. It wasn't patriotism, it was the reactions of men whose body chemistry had changed their brains. It happened after WWII also, as combat vets, missing the adrenaline, took to motorcycles for kicks they were no longer getting. Then, the other side shows up. Sometimes it's right away, sometimes it takes years, but usually manifests itself in nighttime panic, claustrophobia, or other treats. We will have an epidemic of domestic instability and violence, pain and fracture, like we haven't seen for decades, . . and it will reverberate through those families for generations, for the crimes of this administration and those who supported it. This was all done by those who would sully our name with torture - barbarism. Environment, education, economy, world standing, military strength, prospects for the future, moral gravitas - thanks for all you've done, conservatives!
I will support the prosecution of American war criminals, but it needs to start with the Clinton Administration. Clinton signed the executive order authorizing extraordinary rendition and carried it out multiple times during his presidency. That was just as much a violation of international law as water-boarding. Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan that had absolutely nothing to do with the bombing of our embassies by al-Qaeda. Clinton also waged a pre-emptive war against Serbia without United Nations approval. And don't give me the tired story about it being a NATO action. NATO's charter doesn't authorize pre-emptive war and Serbia wasn't threatening any NATO country nor had it attacked one. Clinton justified the war by lying about a non-existent genocide, caused 750,000 Kosovars to be permanently driven from their homes, and had no plan for the peace (the UN just decided a couple of months ago to make Kosovo an independent state, Russia will veto that in the Security council and the Serbs just torched our embassy in Belgrade). Clinton should be prosecuted for treason for overriding the criminal sanctions against Loral Space Corp for giving the Chinese ballistic missile technology. Clinton was advised that the Chinese were spying at Los Alamos and did nothing for a year until it was leaked to the press. He then lied and said he didn't know about it except that a memo was then leaked showing that he and Sandy Berger had been informed a year earlier by the Dept. of Energy that 11 people had been caught stealing secrets. Clinton then chose one of the eleven to prosecute (i.e. Wen ho Lee) against whom the evidence was the weakest so as to make it seem that no spying had occurred. The Democrats commenting on this site couldn't have cared less about any of that. When Clinton is hanged for the crimes he actually committed then I would be willing to support a prosecution of Bush Administration officials for crimes they committed in the vivid imaginations of Democrats.
How many torture supporters here consider The Islamic Republic Of Iraq to be a successful accomplishment? Aren't "Islamic Republics" a cause for concern? Granted their new constitution guarantees free healthcare for every Iraqi citizen, but is that what you all wanted? I think that "victory" in The Islamic Republic Of Iraq will be declared only when their state-owned oil production has been privatized away from them. Is that what we're waiting for?
I guess answering that last question would have violated the Fifth Amendment of Mr Cobalt Another gem I just noticed. Interesting that you view political beliefs contrary to your own as crimes. It seems I am right to be worried about just how far the witch hunts would go.
Cobalt Shiva says: I propose that all witches be granted immunity! Besides, any investigations or trials for war crimes and/or crimes against humanity should begin as high up in the Bush Administration as the evidence allows, and not from the bottom. In the Abu Gharib disgrace, the administration sated the outcry for justice by hanging a few soldiers out to dry and it never touched them. So if recent revelations are true, there's plenty of people at the very top of this administration to look to without having to haul in the ever-trembling torture enablers and cheerleaders who voted for these despoilers of America's honor. Come out from under that bed and go change your shorts.
I don't care about torture but we shouldn't have announced to the world that we do it. It makes us look no better then scumbags like Sadam Hussien. Who ever leaked the info about the water boarding should be tried for treason.
The federal torture statutes (18 USC 2340) are unambiguous -- they clearly prohibit waterboarding and similar forms of abusive "interrogations" under "color of the law." They also prohibit conspiracies to commit torture. The law is clear, the evidence is overwhelming. All that's lacking is the political will, and I don't detect much sign of it. Too bad, because war crimes prosecutions would be a useful way for the next administration to distance itself, in the eyes of the country and the world, from the lawless conduct of this administration.
It's pretty clear that Commander Guy is going to spend the last two or three weeks of his presidency signing pardons 24/7, so I imagine prosecuting senior government officials for war crimes -- or just about anything else, for that matter -- is pretty unlikely. A Democratic Justice Department, assuming there is one, would probably be better off going after the enabling corporations: the Halliburtons, Blackwaters, etc. More aggressive investigations into the multi-varied corruptions of the modern Republican Party (DeLay, Abramoff, etc. etc.)could also yield a rich haul of indictments, enough to keep the GOP off balance and on the defensive for years. Criminalization of policy differences? You bet. But that's what happens when you pursue criminal policies. Oh, and those rednecks threatening a second civil war -- you might want to remember what happened the LAST time you yokels pulled a stunt like that.
Criminalization of policy differences? You bet. Thank you for proving my point. Oh, and those rednecks threatening a second civil war -- you might want to remember what happened the LAST time you yokels pulled a stunt like that. It wouldn't look like the Civil War. It would look like Los Pepes.
War crimes on us, obstructions of justice and sick crimes to the present, with Myers running the chemicals, premeditated murder from 2000 set up illegally. Myers running the chemical corporations, radiation, stalking, gang stalking, threats, injuries and threats to friends to obstruct justice and torture to present, illegal questioniong prior to 9-11, taking ovary and illegal medical interception using other doctors, recircumsiing my son after birth, continued microwave weapons and setting up theft of intellecutal informaation, book, ecuational theory, by gangly Dee Arpino, Attorneys and microwave satanic' stalking from 1995 at sons birth. Attempted murder with chemical warfare, nanotechnology set up premeditated and the last year, illegal acts, paying off spouse, bribery, attempted murder, near death, and over 13 year using illegal surveillance without any rights to present to commit the crimes, obstructions of rights. Myers has been stalking us from beofre the time of my sons birth and satanic stalking from then. General Myers is behind from 1948, the continued 'faliure' on the Jews and blaming the Jews hwile killing the Jewish-Israelite family lines and worldwide, chemicals, attorney bribery, judges bribes, coporations, tainted vaccines, tainted blood, over 5,000 blood frauds with sociopaths in organized crime, Myers controlling the chemical waste and radiation waste (all indicted across the country before getting their bribe money) obstructions of justice daily and theft of intellectual information, destroying, daily crimes of attempted murder. Over 400 other families but this is extreme. Myers has continued daily nonstop crimes on us including finally bribing spouse to bring himeself broke while stealing my intellectual information and torturing my son and I, Over 50K the last four years which I wouldnt spend and daily nonstop crimes. We will see justice.
There would have to have been war crimes comitted to charge anyone with war crimes. To date there have been none so this fringe left wet dream will always be just that. Isn't it ironic that the same President that has protected the rights for you lefties to make such absurd anti-American statements is the guy you hate so much that you lose all rational thinking ability when discussing something as crazy as war crimes trials? Get a life and thank God for President George W. Bush. History will judge him well, so sorry that ruins your day. |
The smart money will bet that nothing will come of it because if there were a prosecution, it follows that previous administrations, including Democrat ones, will also be exposed.
Where you stand depends on where you sit, and once the new President (McCained, OBammBamm, or Hillofbeanary is seated), things are going to look very different.
Posted by D | April 9, 2008 7:16 PM