Crimes Against Humanity..?

[Verto]

I just saw on TV demonstrators who said Bush should be tried for war crimes & crimes against humanity, and how this war would cost hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, bla bla bla. This has been going on for months.

Why aren't these people saying anything about Hussein intentionally building military sites near or beneath hospitals, schools, etc? Why don't they say anything about the people that have died as a result of Hussein's actions? 200,000 people died in prisons, or simply being shot by his henchmen. More than double that died in the war against Iran, and countless others die of starvation, disease.


Well, I guess I already know the answer, I just wanted to rant. Seems some people will do whatever it takes to protest against America and badmouth Bush.

[Spiffor]

While Bush has decided an unprovoked war, followed by nearly the whole US poiliticians, it isn't a crime against humanity.
Crimes against humanity decribe the ordering to kill people en masse for non-military aims. It doesn't need to be millions of deads : for example, a French collaborationist was jaiuled for crime against humanity for a case about 150 jews sent to the death camps (he was involved in many more, but only this case was documented enough to win the trial).

Though Bush's administration is drawing a bad future for the world, with unprovoked wars, complete uncare about environment, and general destabilization of the international community, he doesn't qualify as a criminal against humanity. Saddam does, with the gasing of Al-Hadja.

[johncmcleod]

Spiffor, you're right. Except, though I am against the war, I think we have the right to go in. Saddam is not complying with the agreement. For 12 years he done exactly the opposite of his end of the bargain. He's booted inspectors in the past, and he hasn't destroyed his WoMD (he has a whole lot of them unaccounted for), so therefor we should be allowed to go in there.

War is a bad idea. There were still ways to solve this peacefully.

[JCG]

I *hope* that the only one who ends up being guilty of "crimes against humanity" is Saddam Hussein...but the U.S.A. should better try & keep the casualties low, at least for their own benefit, if not for anything else....

[Dis]

I have never actually heard anyone say that in real life. If someone said that to me, I'd have to smack them.

but these pussies can be brave when sitting at a computer in their comfy little home which was made possible by brave men willing to fight.

[Fidel]

but of course, american presidents are immune from any charges of war crimes. like, when they throw napalm in vietnamese villages, it's actually 'contention of communism'.
also, planning and executing an aggressive war is by no means a breach of law. therefore, bush can be safe.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dissident
but these pussies can be brave when sitting at a computer in their comfy little home which was made possible by brave men willing to fight.

Brave men with superior number, lots and lots of bombs, and high technology.

[St Leo]

but these pussies can be brave when sitting at a computer in their comfy little home which was made possible by brave men willing to fight.

Yeah, I wish I had the courage to be a true hippy and fight for my rights in the streets.

[jdd2007]

Bush cut off 30 million people from health care in 2001. Now there are 70 million americans without health care. Bush's next budget cut, of 1.4 trillion, will help rich people. He thinks that the lower and middle classes don't pay enough taxes. His next budget cut will put $90,000 in millionares' pockets every year. He's changing American foreign policy, which is really gonna hurt in the long run. It will be nice when Saddham isn't in power any more, but how can Bush try to fix another country when there are so many inequities in his own?

[monkspider]

Technically, if the standards of the Nuremburg trials were actually applied, Bush would be hanged for waging aggressive war. Of course, I don't agree with hanging anyone, even those guilty of great villainy.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by LaRusso
but of course, american presidents are immune from any charges of war crimes. like, when they throw napalm in vietnamese villages, it's actually 'contention of communism'.

Which President did this?

[Odin]

Originally posted by DaShi


Which President did this?

Johnson and Nixon.

BTW, Kissinger and Saddam should be cellmates with Milosevic.

[axi]

Kissinger is getting his ass wanted in more and more states as time passes. Now a Greek wants Kissinger tried for specifically plotting his assassination during the Junta. He is also wanted in Chile and Belgium, IIRC.

Strictly speaking, there are no "war crimes". All warfare is criminal in it's nature. Who will be persecuted is judged by the law of the mightiest. Any attempt to rationalise this process will just lead to the total outlawing of warfare, which is only prevented because organised armies do deeds that are de facto unpunished, thus preventing the reduction of the "acceptable" region of warfare.

In other words, in a world full of barbarian hordes, pillaging villages, killing the men and raping the women (or vice versa) is not a war crime.

[Uncle Sparky]

killing the men and raping the women (or vice versa) is not a war crime.

What about the sheep ?! ... or has the Falklands War been forgotten already?