Poll: Should George Bush be tried for crimes against humanity/war crimes?

[matnatz]

I hated the guy as much as any... but c'mon, he wasn't that bad

 

[Veylon]

Seriously, he didn't do anything that FDR and Churchill did during World War II. If we prosecute him, we cripple the abilities of future wartime leaders. Yes, invading Iraq was stupid. Yes, under his watch American soldiers have done some very rotten things.

But it would be hypocritical to go after Bush whilst continuing to cherish such figures as Washington, Madison, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, JFK and others who've done the same or worse in their own times.

The president's job is to defend and uphold the strength and security of the United States and, so long as they're acting in that strain, they should not be prosecuted. If Bush was committing genocide, receiving kickbacks, rigging elections, or otherwise abusing his power (this can be a fine line to judge), then he would certainly be liable.

 

[NoDamnNames]

If there were no repercussions for those who built the atom bomb and those who ordered it built (aside from self inflicted suicide), I doubt much if anything is going to come to old Georgy. One set of people gave the Apocalypse and genocide not only a how but an inevitable when. All he really did was bully a few people and spread terror/racism in comparison.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

I'd love to see Bush tried, but if they could try Cheney and Rove that'd be even better, they've always been the brains behind the Bush administration, Bush was little more than a figurehead.

 

[Mr_spamamam]

I don't agree with any of those choices. The Geneva convention holds no ground against people who don't even wear a uniform for a specific country.

Aside of that point, are we holding him accountable for the torture bit? If so, I really don't think that playing loud music or keeping them awake for long periods of time really counts as torture. I know other things went on, but they are hardly as severe as what they did to our troops and allies. Does the word "beheadings" ring a bell?

Of course he should. He started a war on a sovereign country (Iraq) on false grounds and without a formal declaration of war (which as far as I know is required according to the rules of war). I just hope that he will be tried where ever he goes in the world in the future.

For one, the President does not declare war. The Senate does. They are just as much to blame as Bush may be for going to war 'on false grounds.'

For two, and I know this argument is just asking for it, but just because we didn't FIND any doesn't mean they were not there. I am not saying that just because we didn't find them, that they WERE there, I am only saying that military intelligence can be just as flawed as any random guy on the street. The only difference is that intel has millions of dollars backing it.

I think that considering Bush was such a blatant idiot who could barely string a sentence together...

Have you seen Obama in a situation where his lines are not prepared ahead of time? He is an amazing speaker, but is just terrible when it's improvised. Look up some face-to-face interviews, some time.

1. Beheading is not torture. A beheading is an execution, it only lasts for a short period of time, whereas torture, by definition, lasts for an extended duration
2. Lets put you in a cell, stand you up and keep you in that position for 48 to 72 hours and see if you still dont think its torture.
3. The UN weapons inspectors spent months searching for weapons sites and never found any, intelligence agencies spent millions, possibily billions searching for these weapons of mass distruction and never found a thing. Occams razor dictates that they were never there in the first place

To be honest, most of the American government, and most of the British government, needs to be put on trial for war crimes. But it will never happen

 

[xChevelle24]

He deserves it, but will never face consequence for his actions.

+1 to this.

He is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, but he will NEVER face a trial or jail time for it. Welcome to America.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

If it was fair, I wouldn't mind so much, but I am positive some people are out to get Bush, and would be involved in the proceedings. Despite the crimes, he still should have a fair invesigation. I do worry this will damage America in several ways, so this issue should be considered carefully.

There are those who say that America needs the "damage" that would happen from such a trial. The US has a long, long streak of "exceptionalism" in its political thought and rhetoric; "it's bad for others to do it, but it's okay for us" crops up far too often. If bringing to light the consequences of acting this way knocks holes in the American conceit of being "leader of the free world," so be it.

The biggest reason is that George Bush did this because he was trying to protect the American people.

Yes, torture is wrong, but why are some people more forgiving of murderers and child molesters who acted in their own self interest? There are several examples where murderers and child molesters get off easy, or get second chances when they are still a danger. At least Bush was trying to protect people.

If torture is wrong, it's wrong... no matter the excuse. Besides, as has gone 'round several times here, it just plain doesn't work for gathering useful intelligence; all it does is taint the evidence so that it's no longer reliable (people say whatever they think will stop the pain) and no longer useful in a court of law.

"He meant well" doesn't excuse it, any more than giving a friend a ride while you're drunk is excusable because you were just trying to help.

Try him for what ?

Iraq was in violation of its post war argreements, was rearming and had the capacity to deliver WMD's. Just cause they didnt find a whole one didnt mean there wasn't any. Oh yeah and dont forget he doeposed a freaking genocidial maniac.

The UN inspectors said that US intelligence was wrong; Saddam no longer had the capacity to manufacture and deliver WMDs. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell now admits that he was sold a bill of goods before making his presentation to the UN Security Council, and regrets that presentation more than any other decision in his life.

Saddam was no prize, but the US invaded on the basis of trumped-up charges. It would have been better (in my opinion) to follow the elder Bush's policy decision to let the Iraqis decide the fate of their own nation.

-- Steve

 

[Dante_Alucard]

no way they can because we would just kill any country that tried to fuck with our country

 

[Uncompetative]

You can't kill him, it seems fairly obvious that he isn't mentally competent, its a wonder he could find his way around The White House if I'm honest. He should be put in an institution.

Great Avatar! A break-dancing cat.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Bush is just a twit. I doubt he even ever had an idea of what was going on.
Cheney and Karl Rove are the ones who should be sent away to be the only inmates in Guantanamo.

Cheney especially: he's the one that got the Iraq war started to help out his friends at Haliburton. Do you have any idea how many billions of our tax dollars went to that company.

 

[Gashad]

Whoever made the poll was biased and obviously believes Bush needs to be put on trial for such.

As numerous people have mentioned before, there is no clear white and black answer to this, fanboying hate against him or fanboying the man himself does no one any good and makes you look rather ignorant. (Which you probably are anyways.) In any case, it should be noted that despite whatever claims may be put onto his shoulders, the president of the United States of America is merely one of three government branches and has VERY limited power. (See U.S. military strategy and how much Bush was involved in it for examples.) That being said, it's hard to believe that he can be held responsible for every thing that he may have done wrong in office.

On a unrelated note, all politicians are...politicians. Any one who would claim there are good politicians in the world (probably from their country of origin) needs to lay off the moonsugar and study the common behaviours of politicians.

Indeed I stated in my post that I thought he should be tried(How can i ask others for their opinion if i don't have my own?). However I am willing to concede that there should be one more option which states that he may have done somethings wrong but should not be prosecuted. I believe I have added one there now but can't check as I already voted(I apologize to all who wished to vote for it but voted something else due to a lack of a choice, I know its "unprofessional" to change polls half way through).

Moreover I agree to the points made that George Bush really only did what many others have done before him, but generally more blatantly and openly. However I am of the opinion that the world should be more active in putting leaders responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity at trial(That others where just as bad is not a very good excuse in my opinion). I am especially interested in how the ICC will act considering they have already pressed charges against a head of state(the Sudanese president).

 

[Bill Door]

Hello! I am a regular visitor here, though not so active.
I saw this thread and had to respond to it.
People! seriously! who do you think are those guys overseas the US is fighting with?
its easy to think about them as the poor people, as those innocent people living their poor lives.
Are you THAT blind guys?? those Islamic nations exists way longer then USA, and they have a HUGE amount of natural resources... Then why are they living like this? how come they are not a huge superpower? the way of life in those areas is way different then what you know! That is why they are all living like this! you must understand your enemy and fight them by their rules!!! otherwise you'll have another 9/11 on your hands! and for god sake! Iran developing nuclear power???? do you honestly think they'll keep those bombs in a warehouse??? those bombs WILL get to the hands of terrorists!!! and you sit here and discuss putting a man in prison for trying to stop it! you are so naive!

I am disgusted every time "pacifistic" (i.e. stupidly naive) people talk like this about any war against terrorism, if its the US VS Iraq or Israel VS the Hamas. for the love of god! those terrorists sent a SNIPER not long ago that shot a 3 Y.O girl in a stroller right in front of her parents! using CHILDREN (!!!!) as human shields at gunpoint!!! and you all sit in your nice house and blame the only people who are brave enough to fight them. and yeah! innocent people get hurt! it happens when the enemy uses them as shields! blame the enemy for it!

here is a situation for you: you have a gun, a terrorist armed with an automatic weapon grabs a kid and uses him as a shield as he shoots at you and other innocent people. you shoot him risking injury or death to the child, or watch as the terrorist slaughters everyone around you until finally one of his bullets pierce your own head killing the only man able to resist the slaughter?

what ever! i was just so mad i had to blow off some steam... agree or disagree i don't give a damn... i just hope i wont be alive to see the first NUCLEAR suicide bombing, wiping new york, or Sidney, or London, or what ever city full of naive people...

and i know the topic is about torture... and i fully support torturing terrorists... and if a relative of yours should ever find himself in an exploding bus, or in the path of a missile, or in front of a sniper rifle, you'll think the same way...

allowing Iran to develop nuclear capabilities... how STUPID a man has to be to think its a god idea? pfft...

 

[Xan Krieger]

Hello! I am a regular visitor here, though not so active.
I saw this thread and had to respond to it.
People! seriously! who do you think are those guys overseas the US is fighting with?
its easy to think about them as the poor people, as those innocent people living their poor lives.
Are you THAT blind guys?? those Islamic nations exists way longer then USA, and they have a HUGE amount of natural resources... Then why are they living like this? how come they are not a huge superpower? the way of life in those areas is way different then what you know! That is why they are all living like this! you must understand your enemy and fight them by their rules!!! otherwise you'll have another 9/11 on your hands! and for god sake! Iran developing nuclear power???? do you honestly think they'll keep those bombs in a warehouse??? those bombs WILL get to the hands of terrorists!!! and you sit here and discuss putting a man in prison for trying to stop it! you are so naive!

I am disgusted every time "pacifistic" (i.e. stupidly naive) people talk like this about any war against terrorism, if its the US VS Iraq or Israel VS the Hamas. for the love of god! those terrorists sent a SNIPER not long ago that shot a 3 Y.O girl in a stroller right in front of her parents! using CHILDREN (!!!!) as human shields at gunpoint!!! and you all sit in your nice house and blame the only people who are brave enough to fight them. and yeah! innocent people get hurt! it happens when the enemy uses them as shields! blame the enemy for it!

here is a situation for you: you have a gun, a terrorist armed with an automatic weapon grabs a kid and uses him as a shield as he shoots at you and other innocent people. you shoot him risking injury or death to the child, or watch as the terrorist slaughters everyone around you until finally one of his bullets pierce your own head killing the only man able to resist the slaughter?

what ever! i was just so mad i had to blow off some steam... agree or disagree i don't give a damn... i just hope i wont be alive to see the first NUCLEAR suicide bombing, wiping new york, or Sidney, or London, or what ever city full of naive people...

and i know the topic is about torture... and i fully support torturing terrorists... and if a relative of yours should ever find himself in an exploding bus, or in the path of a missile, or in front of a sniper rifle, you'll think the same way...

allowing Iran to develop nuclear capabilities... how STUPID a man has to be to think its a god idea? pfft...

you sir have just said it all. Obama stoppig the torture is a step in the wrong direction that lets the terrorists win. If one person has to suffer so hundreds will live then so be it.

 

[chronobreak]

Drug dealers don't know what someone is gonna do on the drug that they give them, but they make it possible for it to happen by supplying the person. I think the same level of accountability should be held by a President, of all people. He chose to run for his position knowing full well that he would be held responsible for things like this. If the average joe can't get a break on a parking ticket, I want Bush to at least have a trial.

 

[Xaryn Mar]

Hello! I am a regular visitor here, though not so active.
I saw this thread and had to respond to it.
People! seriously! who do you think are those guys overseas the US is fighting with?
its easy to think about them as the poor people, as those innocent people living their poor lives.
Are you THAT blind guys?? those Islamic nations exists way longer then USA, and they have a HUGE amount of natural resources... Then why are they living like this? how come they are not a huge superpower? the way of life in those areas is way different then what you know! That is why they are all living like this! you must understand your enemy and fight them by their rules!!! otherwise you'll have another 9/11 on your hands! and for god sake! Iran developing nuclear power???? do you honestly think they'll keep those bombs in a warehouse??? those bombs WILL get to the hands of terrorists!!! and you sit here and discuss putting a man in prison for trying to stop it! you are so naive!

I am disgusted every time "pacifistic" (i.e. stupidly naive) people talk like this about any war against terrorism, if its the US VS Iraq or Israel VS the Hamas. for the love of god! those terrorists sent a SNIPER not long ago that shot a 3 Y.O girl in a stroller right in front of her parents! using CHILDREN (!!!!) as human shields at gunpoint!!! and you all sit in your nice house and blame the only people who are brave enough to fight them. and yeah! innocent people get hurt! it happens when the enemy uses them as shields! blame the enemy for it!

here is a situation for you: you have a gun, a terrorist armed with an automatic weapon grabs a kid and uses him as a shield as he shoots at you and other innocent people. you shoot him risking injury or death to the child, or watch as the terrorist slaughters everyone around you until finally one of his bullets pierce your own head killing the only man able to resist the slaughter?

what ever! i was just so mad i had to blow off some steam... agree or disagree i don't give a damn... i just hope i wont be alive to see the first NUCLEAR suicide bombing, wiping new york, or Sidney, or London, or what ever city full of naive people...

and i know the topic is about torture... and i fully support torturing terrorists... and if a relative of yours should ever find himself in an exploding bus, or in the path of a missile, or in front of a sniper rifle, you'll think the same way...

allowing Iran to develop nuclear capabilities... how STUPID a man has to be to think its a god idea? pfft...

Well then let's just nuke half the worlds population and get it over with, sounds like a good idea? No of course not that would only generate more hatred of us here in the west and that would mean more terror. The only way to fight terror is through education and goodwill. Yes it will take a long time and yes there will be terror actions during that time but if we educate and help enough people to gain a better life they will not become suicide bombers or the like.
This might sound naive but it is the only long term solution that will work (except eradicating humanity, both western and others). War and torture although understandable in some cases doesn't solve long term problems. They only solve them short term and generate more hatred for our children to reap.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

guys, you're so harsh
dont get me wrong - im no texican bush supporter and the idea that he was president for 2 terms scares the hell out of me, but calm down - it's like the blair situation, people forget that he had to get approval from his secretary of state/defense and advice from his advisers before he made any decision

people look at him way too harshly, he was an idiot basically and shouldnbt have been president, but that's the country's fault for electing him, not his fault for screwing up
be honest, if you had the chance to be president, even if you were an idiot, you'd take it wouldnt you?

blame the american voters for bush's mistakes