On what grounds would the U.S. not “take it”? In the hypothetical example, a U.S. citizen would be arrested on Western European soil, indicted of war crimes and/or crimes against humanity, and put on trial. In a Western democracy. To rules of criminal proceedings. With an attorney for the defense. Presumably AFTER a court had found sufficient cause for the indictment (as that’s the usual procedure in European jurisprudence as well as yours). In other words, is it the legal right of any democratic country to bring any person to trial for crimes against humanity / war crimes that you deny, or is it any country’s right to do so with an American citizen, or is it any country’s right to do so with an American ex-President?
Note that I don’t believe there is either good cause for such an indictment nor any likelihood thereof, nor any chance any European state will take the chance, but the knee-jerk “send the Marines!” reaction to an action that I heard nobody complain of when it was used on, say, Milosevic, is in need of explanation. Notwithstanding the silliness of the OP.
Oh c’mon, John. There is a vast gulf between a soldier in the heat of whatever he’s facing doing what he does, and a general deliberately and coldly ordering the torture of someone he has never faced.
There is an even larger gulf between that general, who may or may not have the kind of experience in combat that would shape his views on the subject, and a President with vastly more responsibility, being complicit in said orders by, I’m quite certain, ignoring them while at the same time making certain that nothing could be traced back directly to him, including his crime of omission.
You should know that. An executive with unlimited powers should be the bane of a libertarian. I shouldn’t even have to point that out.
No. He said he’d heard those stories from others. But then, one with your severe case of Kool-Aid poisoning shouldn’t be expected to care about such mundane details as simple facts. When are you going to quit pretending? :rolleyes:
Agreed, Bush was never much interested in the outside world before his Presidency, and there’s no sign he’s gained any interest since. The OP question is moot.
I’m not going to argue about the details of that example because they don’t really matter. If you want a higher-up, then let’s talk about Clinton. He waged a bombing campaign against Serbia w/o first getting approval from the UNSC. Substitute Clinton for Bush in aleric’s thread and what would it tell you about lefites if they weren’t perturbed by such a scenario?
Or, what about Blair? Should he give up summer vacations in Spain for fear of being arrested and tried for War Crimes? What would it confrim about any given class of posters if they weren’t perturbed by that scenario?
But more to the point, can you elaborate on what specifically it confirms about the “righties” on this board that they aren’t “perturbed” by aleric’s thread? What is the proper reaction to that thread, other than derision?
I didn’t realize that by calling aleric’s thread absurd I was endorsing an executive with unlimited powers. Probably because I wasn’t. I shouldn’t have to potint that out to you.
Wow I have to agree with Tomndebb completely. This is a thread that was interesting in theory but then it got all alarcithegothed up and became the scribblings of someone who apparently belongs in a hospital for his mental health and safety.
what about Blair? Should he give up summer vacations in Spain*
in point of fact, there are murmurs to that effect, but he not being our war criminal, I left it to Wolcott (whom you evidently failed to read) to discuss Blair.
sorry to diappoint. he was in violation of international law, he did deserve a trip to the hague. In the event, the outcome of his little adventure being less of a disaster than G-dub’s mesopotamian frolic, the heat never came down.
what is so complicated about “no lynch mobs allowed” If you want to have an international system of collective security, and I submit that in the long run it is better for everyone, you have to swallow your spleen from time to time, just like none of us is up for committing assault and battery in front of the cops. That’s what it means to have a security council.
Surely, even you bush-heads must wish right now that we had not slunk away from that last vote, and having lost it, held our mud.
Well, there is something to be said about stepping up security at the mental institutions in this country.
I’m not one to deride people over spelling mistakes. I make a few of my own. But you seem to hold stock in it. And your grammer is less than admirable. The fact you like to try to get digs in on Bush for being unintelligent, while posting proof of your own lack of basic education, makes my asshole laugh.
President Dean? I thought you were going for some sort of twisted metaphor or something. I think you may actually believe it to be true. It really wouldn’t surprise me to find you think he’s President. EEEEEE-YAHHHHHHH!!!11ONE!!
You’re an idiot. Well, you’re more than that, but some things we can’t say though a person demonstrates what they are on an alarmingly consitant basis.
If Bush is so evil, and wants nothing more than to stifle your civil rights, and wants to quash your very voice in your own sick little world, why hasn’t he used the Patriot Act to hunt you down and send you to some secret prison?
You have a nice little conspiracy worked out over this. Why don’t you buy into it? None of us do, but at least you could if you’re going to pull shit out of your ass. It’s your reality that Bush is out to get you. Why are you taunting him? Don’t you know that the Patriot Act is designed to ferret out dissent?
I’d suggest being a little more polite. You’re on thin ice as it is. I’ve received the memo tonight, and as a favor want to let you know they’ve caught up to you. Your worst dreams are being realized.
You’ve said enough, and George doesn’t like it. Neither does Cheney. And that’s where you really went wrong. You thought you could criticize the administration with no consequence in saying they were out to silence critics? You should keep a light on tonight. I don’t think they’ll allow what you’re doing much longer.
Wait. What do you mean you have nothing to worry about? If they were half as bad as you state I’d be shitting myself.
Maybe it’s time to admit you’re bored and in need of getting laid. Nobody is buying your bullshit. And the one’s that agree with you in this thread? Like I said, nobody is buying your bullshit.
You tried pulling this with me in another thread. Stating your handle was based on your family’s history. That was when I mentioned your “goth” part. You stated it was some family lineage, which I bought. You’re full of shit.
It’s what I suspected the first time around, isn’t it? You’re some kid that lives the goth lifestyle thinking it makes you unique and different from us lesser mortals.
Keep lashing out at the world that oppresses you. The rest of us will continue to go to work and support your sorry ass.
When you move out of the basement, bring pie. We’ve worked up an appetite paying your way.
Anything can happen in 2 years, of course, but from the perspective of right now, the most likely match up would be McCain vs HC, and I think the only suspense to be found in that election would be will McCain win, or will he win by the largest margin in history?
??? I hope you’re not saying that based on the meaningless straw poll that happened recently. National polls put McCain and Giuliani way ahead of Frist-- he’s burried in the single digit noise in those polls.
Then how about not posting to your own fucking thread five times in a row!
Look, you are a marginally functional far-left fruitcake. I can accept that - heaven knows you aren’t alone hereabouts. But you are an annoying, marginally functional far-left fruitcake. Give the hamsters a freaking break - organize the thoughts in that sludge pile at the top of your spinal cord, put them into one fucking post, and then give it a rest, wouldja?