One of the key charges against Saddam Hussein, and for which he is being tried in court, is the invasion of Kuwait. The reasons for invading Iraq, as touted by GWB, have failed to materialize and it has been adequately demonstrated that Iraq as a country was in no way an enemy of the US, nor was it a military threat.
Why then should Bush not be tried for invasion of Iraq?
Because Mr. Bush’s army is bigger.
Though you’re welcome to try.
Bush is not a dictator, unilaterally making decisions for an entire country.
You might be able to make a case to try him for treason though, misleading the country into a war. It’d be a very hard sell though.
'Coz he actually does have Weapons of Mass Destruction . Real ones, not past their use by date or anything. Lots of 'em. Try a citizens arrest though, it could work.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Best…Line…Ever!!!
Mr. Pants is correct. You’d have to throw Rumsfield, Cheney, and Condi into the mix, too.
He should be. But “should be” and “is” are not always the same.
Sounds good to me. Perhaps we can throw in Ashcroft as well. Encase them in a large cube of lucite and send them hurtling into space. The cost would be astronomical, but I’d be willing to bet that other countries would help foot the bill.
Because Bush won and Hussein lost.
No, seriously! What have the Bush supporters have to say to this duplicity? GWB may not be a dictator, but he is the person ultimately responsible for calling the invasion. It is his government that did it. It is Bush who lobbied and it is Bush who rooted for the invasion. It was he who is eventually responsible for the decision because it was in his hands to go ahead with the invasion or call it off. He didn’t. Why shouldn’t he be prosecuted? Why is the American population quiet? Why can’t they see through his deceit and deception that is so abunadly clear? Does that imply that the general American person is stupid?
Hey, don’t let our worse half speak for all of us. About half of us are seemingly of sound body and mind.
Careful, careful, such an attitude does not win voters for your side.
Big article today in the Times today about how the CIA may have misled Bush and the rest, selectively spinning some info and ignoring some of the rest:
The American people are usually generous and willing to give the benefit of the doubt when somebody has made a mistake, however important it was. It is that benefit that is keeping people “quiet” (although I sure see a lot of posters, demonstrations, and people yelling at hapless passersby in Union Square holding signs that essentially summarize your last post, so I’m not sure where you’re seeing all these sheeplike folks). Also, it’s hard for anybody to get too upset that Saddam Hussein will never terrorize anybody again except perhaps his lawyers.
You see it as a deliberate and cynical lie. I see it as a terrible mistake in judgement. But both of us will be casting our votes against Bush this November, and the machines won’t care what’s in our minds when they record our votes.
People forget that Bush does care about the American people, and he is doing what he thinks is right for all of us. I never doubted him on that. I am voting against him for other reasons.
I wish I could believe that.
Unfortunately, I feel that the man doesn’t give a flying fart about what’s right for the American people. If he did, he wouldn’t have let over 800 American soliders die in a place we have no legitimate reason to be. He wouldn’t have thrown us into deficits which will take more than a generation to pay off, nor would he be trying to amend the Constitution to deny civil rights to a certain segment of the population. Nor would he be pushing to log our national forrests, or try to lower already somewhat weak EPA regulations.
I think George Bush cares about what’s right for George Bush. Between his egomania, religious zealotry and his desire to be re-elected, the welfare of the American people really doesn’t matter. I suppose it’s possible he may think he’s doing what’s right, but I don’t think that he’s that self-deluding. I think that deep down, in his heart-of-hearts, he knows that he’s wreaking havok on this country-- and he doesn’t care.
Gotta side with Lissa here; after seeing Bush in office for four years, the whole “courage of his convictions” and “doing what God tells him is best” stuff just seems like so much bull for the feeble-minded. His actions speak for themselves, and the only thing George W. Bush ultimately cares about is what’s best for George W. Bush.
As for the OP, I continue to find it depressingly bizarre that this nation’s politicians can craft an excuse to impeach a President for having consenting sex with a willing intern, but has to hem and haw its way about a President lying to the nation to start a war without provocation. Might as well tell the cops to forget the murders and go bust some jaywalkers.
Of COURSE Bush should be tried for war crimes, it’s obvious he started a war that need not have occurred. He should be rotting in a jail cell right this very minute. But with a Republican Congress and America with all the best weapons, nobody’s going to call him to account for his crimes. A show trial in absentia in the Hague would be a good thing, but I don’t expect the European leadership to grow any balls and actually do it.
People, Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice in the Paula Jones case, and then compounding the matter by lying about Monica. I believed Paula, trailer trash she may be.
Anyway, I get the feeling this is the first President the OP has known as an adult. You’re going to find as life goes on that Presidents make decisions and do things you don’t like. That you really really hate, in fact. And that their judgement does sometimes not match your own. It’ll probably happen at some time with every President, no matter how much you like them or dislike them. So relax. You have the opportunity to fire him in November. And if your fellow citizens return him to office instead, the world will keep on turning.
While I understand fully that it will make not the slightest difference to this latest orgy of Bush-bashing, I will confine myself to pointing out that there has been no violation of US law. Nor of international law, such as it is.
I realize that some of you would really, really like this not to be the case, and that there were really some grounds to impeach Bush. But I also realize that some of you would really, really like Miss July 2004 to step out of the centerfold with a six pack and a tube of Astro-glide, and that isn’t going to happen either.
Fantasies are fun, but they should not be mistaken for reality.
Have fun with “Bush is eeeee-vil”, part 9,326.
Regards,
Shodan
Good point but you are forgetting one major point… Saddam is foriegn… Bush is not.
Because there is no way that you can compare Bush to Saddam. Saddam was a dictator. His people were powerless against him. He used to order thosands of unlawful killings.
What ever Bushes reasons for going to war , whether it be purley for oil or because he saw Saddam as a threat, the war was the reason of saddam’s downfall. Yes lots of innocent people were killed in the process but the majority of his people now fill free.
You must have seen that dancing doll of saddam that is being sold over there, and how his people tore his statues down cheering. He could not have been beaten without our intervention.
Sometimes being a good leader is sticking by what you believe at the time to be right even if it makes you seem the big bad wolf. Alot of people protested but Bush felt strongly enough to put his reputation and job on the line for what he believed in.
The man is only human and does not deserve to be treated as a criminal
Yes people it really is that simple.
Bush = democracy = good guy = must be right = cannot do wrong
so when he says:
‘Saddam = dictator = bad guy = must be wrong = must be punished’
Why isn’t that clear?
Do you think you know better that the President of the USA??
What on earth are you thinking when going against this logic??
Please will you finally just stop all that thinking stuff and just let yourselves be led.