I’m willing to stipulate that Cheney is an evil bastard whose policies and actions resulted in the deaths and torture of thousands if not hundreds of thousands, significant damage to the USA’s moral standing in the world and the facilitation of corrupt political practices throughout all levels of the federal government. However:
And therein lies the rub. Even if there was remotely the political will to pursue this (and there isn’t), tying Cheney directly to specific criminal acts with sufficient evidence to support the charges would be challenging to say the least. I’m not a fan of show trials no matter how evil the bastard is, so unless one can come up with a substantive legal case I’d prefer to save the taxpayers the costs of a pointless trial and attack the legacy, not the man himself.
Look into false equivalence sometime. Yes, there’s a “debate”, but not one that stands up to any scrutiny.
Another is that Obama would so quickly believed by the credulous to be indulging in the same sort of crap Bush and Cheney did that it would be a waste of his political capital. That isn’t his fault, or even Bush’s and Cheney’s, btw, but that of the credulous.
Dude, Why not go after some of those war criminals in the middle east? Got all the evidence you need right there on you Tube. Start raising a ruckus about that, and them.
Oh wait, i get it. If you raise a ruckus about them they might actually send someone around to your place and pull a Charlie Hebdo on you.
You’d rather we took those people to the Hague instead of our current policy of trying to kill them? Or are you suggesting we should deal with Cheney via a drone strike? Because otherwise I’m not seeing the point of this comparison.
But people aren’t even calling for anyone else to be tried. They’re acting as if the Bush administration are the worst criminals ever.
This has nothing to do with genuine war crimes. This is just idiots on the left trying to top the idiots on the right. The idiots on the right impeached Clinton so the idiots on the left want to try Cheney for war crimes.
Not “war crimes” but Nixon is the obvious example. If you set a precedent of criminal investigations against the previous administration you’re on a slippery slope of even worse political partisanship and dysfunctional government than we have now (and yes, it’s possible). Transparency will drop to zero, public funds and legislative time will be spent on trials rather than governing, the three branches of government will fight amongst themselves…there’s very little upside to it.
That’s not remotely true. This is not a tit-for-tat maneuver; there’s a genuine argument that the Bush administration took us into war on false pretenses AND that they sanctioned torture in violation of international rules and agreements (and common decency). Clinton’s situation had bugger all to do with it.
The fact that the practicalities of the situation militate against a prosecution of anyone involved does not mean that this is a partisan fishing expedition like Whitewater. That’s a false equivalence.
I’m offering the most parsimonious explanation I can think of for the current situation. And it would seem most people in this thread agree. If you have a better explanation, let’s hear it.
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
The thread is about what should happen. Often, even usually, doing the right thing is harder than doing the expedient thing and trying to rationalize it afterward. One other consequence of telling morality to fuck off, btw, is that you no longer get to claim moral leadership in the world anymore, yanno. But that’s more the fault of the large number of us who try to avoid dealing with the problem.
[/QUOTE]
A lot of things ‘should’ happen. You seem to have (as usual) a huge chip on your shoulder about this stuff and just seem to want to be as rancorous as you can in your responses. Myself, I’m just trying to keep it real which you take as sympathy for Cheney because anyone who isn’t in lock step with you is obviously a Bush fanatic.
You need to recalibrate whatever it is you use to simulate humor.
Sure it is. Good grief. Do you seriously feel that just any crackpot making a charge makes it legitimate? If some right wing Republican group makes a charge against Obama does that make it legitimate?? Some left wing lawyer group founded in 2007 makes a charge against Cheney and you just swallow that? Sorry, my standards are a bit higher. As I said, show me a government that’s seriously pursuing charges against Cheney or Bush (not some elected official obviously doing it for publicity but an actual government) and I’ll take it seriously.
The irony of this statement juxtaposed with your previous one is…well, it’s not off the charts (this IS the SDMB after all), but it’s pretty freaking amusing. Yeah, I’m well aware of how our system works. I’m also aware that if anyone SERIOUSLY thought they could nail him and get a conviction that someone would have tried more than some drive by accusations.
Why would I play the back up your strawman game? As to ‘spurious’, I’ll continue to call them as I see them. When I see a real, legitimate group pursuing charges in a serious manner I’ll be happy to say that THEY, at least, aren’t spurious.
I followed up with a link to a cite showing one group doing exactly this. And a quick Google search shows nearly a million additional hits. So, I think I’ve done my part on this tangential topic. If you aren’t aware that not everyone feels that Obama’s drone policy is ‘legal’ wrt international law then you should really educate yourself. It’s not JUST Republicans that have issues with it or think it’s ‘illegal’, and the main point stands that once we start down the path you are advocating it’s going to make it very difficult to get anything done in this country between the already contentious parties. If there are or were legitimate charges and evidence enough to convict Cheney (or Bush or anyone else) I’m good with taking that chance, but not with anything less.
How about we make a deal. We let Cheney be indited along with EVERY OTHER LEADER who has committed or authorized torture OR has killed civilians with drone strikes.
Anyone want to compile a list of who would be up on charges?
Big question: wouldn’t Obama be on that list too?
Genuine arguments notwithstanding, it does seem that this all stems from an obsessive-compulsive hatred of Dick Cheney by the political left. As Little Nemo pointed out, they’re not interested in anybody else. Not even George Bush. That suggests that they’re not motivated by justice, so much as revenge.
