WTH? You think this is a game and someone is keeping score? That’s almost as lunatic as the reasoning you’ve put forth vis-a-vis “poor people willing to withstand torture to get into the US.”
See, I am actually surrounded by poor people, living as I do in a Third World Nation. And I speak to them everyday. Thus I am speaking from experience when I tell you that not one of them – excepting the clearly insane – would take you so-called “offer.” On the contrary, you’d be surprised if you actually went out and took a poll, at just how well informed most of these people are regarding the abuses committed by the United States and how opposed to them they actually are. Go on, do it yourself, no need to believe me.
Poor does not equal ignorant by any stretch of the imagination, so please, stop trying to do their thinking for them. It’s as insulting as your proposal.
THe more I think about it the more I think Obama wants to appear to not be the driving force behind this but also is not against it but rather has realised this has taken a life of its own and is unstoppable and he can move a tad slow and pretend he is being forced to act by the course things are taking. That way he can let Congress take the initiative and he can reamain a bit above things and not make more enemies over this than strictly necessary. In that sense I think it is essential that the pressure continue. If in the end justice is done I will not blame Obama for not acting more speedily even though I disagree with him not releasing the photos.
As far as I know, it’s just a gesture, they will never get to arrest anyone (if they can even make the charges stick). It’s symbolic. I don’t know why Obama is (apparently) backing away now, this genie should NOT go back in the bottle. Even if no one ever answers for it, we need to make sure it can’t happen again. Ever.
Excellent news. The capture of political criminals by international networks it is the best that had happened to mankind since Rock and Roll.
Let’s hope these guys take a hollyday in Europe to see what happens.
What utter strawmanning, Waterboarding it should be noted has been used in the past and I think while it is torture, it is extreme to denounce everyone who merely led it to being used.
Well, it’s a good thing this zombie was revived as I was on the edge of my seat, wondering if the Spanish would in fact follow through and bring Bush and his evil henchmen to justice! I really thought there was a chance there…
Of course there wasn’t. If the last few decades show anything it’s that you can be a criminal and a monster and get away with it without punishment, if you are a Republican President. The Democrats will even cover for you, despite the fact that the Republicans would never return the favor.
Well declaring war under false pretenses, as Bush and Cheney did in Iraq, might also be considered a WEEEE bit of a war crime and a human rights violation.
The Republicans went after Clinton relentlessly, and even got him disbarred. As opposed to the Democrats, who never went after Bush and who worked to help cover up the torture and other crimes of the Bush Administration.
Because Clinton didn’t have anything they could twist into an impeachable offense; they certainly tried hard enough and hurt plenty of people in the process. As opposed to, say, lying to Congress to get the country into a war, and engaging in torture.
And Nixon was (of course!) pardoned. Just as Obama has worked to ensure that Bush’s torture campaign is never seriously investigated.
War crimes are about violations of international laws of war and generally just legislate what’s not supposed to be happening when countries are already at war, things like “don’t shoot medics” or “mustard gas is not nice”. Waterboarding might be lumped in there, but bullshitting the country into supporting the invasion decidedly isn’t. I’m also pretty sure the universal declaration of the rights of man does not include the right not to be lied to and made a fool of by your politicos, so no go on the human rights violation.
What you’re looking for is “Crime against peace”, which bans the planning, implementation and waging of wars of aggression. But I’m sure a lawyer would argue that Iraq technically wasn’t a war of aggression, since the purpose ostensibly wasn’t to seize the land and subjugate the people.
Finally, I don’t believe anyone has ever been charged (never mind convicted) with a crime against peace anyway - except for the Nazis of course, since that piece of law was pretty much written in order to charge them with it before the ink could dry :).
