This guy seems to think he should, and that it’s virtually inevitable that he will be. Will the US ever bring him to trial, or will it be an international tribunal? Will it have the backing of the US government, or will we fight it tooth and nail? What about Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bremer, etc.?
Left-wing website promotes a left-wing academic who promotes the power of ‘international law’ in attacking right wingers. News at 11.
There’s really no way to determine what machinations the kleptocratic bureaucrats at the UN are going to cook up next in their endless campaign to demonize conservatives and the United States. They may even be able to get an indictment. But they’re not going to get custody of any US official, and Dick Cheney is never going to go to prison.
This isn’t merely a consequence of the fact that Cheney didn’t commit any war crimes, though that’s certainly the first line of defense. Any US president (or any head of state, really) is going to be wary of giving too much power to an external body in the correct observation that his successor may use the same power against him.
You’re right about the chances of him being prosecuted, however, you’re bafflingly wrong about if he’s guilty or not. He certainly ordered torture.
Based on recent precedent he will likely get a major US airport named after him.
Should he? Well, I’m not sure about that. I suppose if I knew what actual crimes he is supposed to have committed it would be easier to judge. The article just makes some bald assertions but without anything showing what the crimes actually were.
There is essentially zero chance he ever will be. I mean, in an infinite universe anything is possible, and I suppose from a probability perspective you can’t say flat out that there is zero chance, but I’m going to go with the odds being around snow balls chance of lasting for a few years in hottest part of hell probability.
Well, yeah, he does. I’m unsure how his assertion should be taken seriously, though. He seems kind of nutty to me, but I admit I never heard of him before your article so maybe he’s a well respected authority on international law and the possibility of dragging Chaney to an ICC trial.
No and no.
Fight what? As far as I know there is no big effort to even bring this to the ICC in the first place, nor any international effort by any credible agencies to bring him or anyone else from the old Bush administration to trial, so there isn’t anything TOO fight, again afaik anyway. The only things I’ve ever seen wrt trials of Cheney or Bush or any of their cronies usually comes from loopy and fringe left wing organizations.
But, let’s assume that the entire EU along with Japan and other western powers decided that, yeah, Cheney REALLY needs to be tried for war crimes. I doubt the US would cave into even those demands to turn him over for trial. At best, under unrealistic international pressure we MIGHT file charges ourselves and try him, especially if there was some meat to the accusations under our own laws, but give him up under foreign pressure? Not a chance, IMHO anyway.
Them either. It’s a lefties fantasy and nothing more. As is the perception that Obama caved into pressure not to try them or pack them off to the ICC.
One such convention to which the US is a party, and therefore constitutes US law, is the UN Convention Against Torture:
IOW yes he should, but no he won’t, and not just him, and not just for torture. That doesn’t even get into the war of aggression charge that would be harder to convict on.
Never, ever in the US. Every president would be vulnerable, the way we go throwing our military weight about.
BTW, this is the same answer every time this comes up-- and it’s been, what at least 3 or 4 times that we’ve had this debate on this MB?
The process was actually started in Germany under the universal jurisdiction clause of the Rome Statute creating the International Criminal Court. It was abandoned under political pressure, though.
Hell, never, ever in ANY country that hasn’t been completely conquered. Every time this comes up I think ‘well, I suppose when Assad or lil’ Kimmy are dragged there it might be possible. Or, well, just about every other world leader involved in just about any sort of internal or external conflict’. It’s like asking when Putin is going to be tried for war crimes and whether or not he ‘should’ be. But no one ever really asks that question seriously, since it’s basically never going to happen and everyone knows it. So, better to just keep poking at Cheney and Bush since it reflects how evil we are that we haven’t turned them over for trial and execution by the ICC…or something. 
But it wasn’t filed BY Germany…it was filed by The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights who have a pretty small and pathetic wiki page (unless my quick google search missed their far more substantial one somewhere)
Shouldn’t we stand for something just a little better than that?
Should we? We are, in the end, just another country and unexceptional based on myriad threads about the US. Why SHOULD we be different than, well, everyone else in this regard? No other nation would voluntarily turn over it’s leadership based on spurious accusations by meaningless groups in foreign countries for trial, so why should we? If he broke US law then I’m good with bringing charges, but I haven’t noticed anyone really doing that. To be sure, some or even most of that might be political, and if so I think that’s a bit sad, but it’s also how our system functions. I’m fairly sure no one here seriously wants the precedence set, since Obama and HIS administration could and probably would be equally open to similar charges (drone strikes if nothing else), and in the end that would further cripple and stifle our government and system as the two parties would be actively at war with each other and agitating to bring charges against the other when they are or were out of power.
The US never ratified the ICC agreement. It has bilateral immunity agreements with most of the countries preventing them from turning a US citizen over in accordance with the agreement. Maybe the world decides to gang up and go after Cheney anyway. Except a lot of them know that some of their senior officials could be implicated as well. Those black sites outside the US casts a wide net to pull people in to the ICC docket. One you start digging around in Cheney’s closet there’s a lot of non-American skeletons to unearth. For those countries there’s no interest in pushing the issue much past a talking point declaiming the American role.
The US didn’t touch it with Obama and the torture report fresh. As passions fade for most from that point, I doubt anything happens internally.
Buergenthal wants it to happen. I think that’s his primary evidence for thinking it will happen.
That’s an awfully fucking depressing thought, that justice is for other suckers. It’s equivalent to “It’s not torture if we do it”.
Cite “spurious”?
Already established at Abu Ghraib.
Again, shouldn’t it be?
What clause in what treaty or other law would apply?
Or it could help all of our leaders behave better. Enforcing laws tends to have a deterrent effect.
Setting aside your “but both sides do it” stuff, speaking of spuriousness, that is.
If some other country thinks they want to put our current or former leaders on trial, then I invite them to try and invade our soil and capture those persons.
So, another vote for “justice is for other suckers, not us”. That’s what, 2-0 now?
It would set a bad president.
It’s exceptionalism. So it’s obviously legit.
Call it realpolitik if you must. Our leaders need to be able to do what they believe is right for the country without worrying about whether a hostile administration will hand them over to some foreign court on political charges a few years after they leave office.
I will not dispute at all that Bush and Cheney are among the worst pieces of work to ever occupy the White House, but I don’t want them put on trial for their executive decisions any more than I would want Obama put on trial for his in 2023 if Republicans are running the country by then.
Why didn’t the Democrats impeach him when they got control of Congress? If they didn’t do it then, don’t expect anyone to come in later and do so.