Would you let * off the hook to bring the troops home now?

[wtmusic]

On July 1, 2004, when its exemption from UN war crimes prosecution expired, the Bush administration overnight officially became liable for war crimes committed in Iraq and elsewhere (unofficially long before, but that's another subject). IMO it's only a matter of time before Bush and at least 8 other administration officials hang for their crimes.

Should the UN issue a pardon for all Americans, in return for immediate withdrawal from Iraq? Besides saving thousands of lives and returning to the Iraqi people what is rightfully theirs, the UN would send an unmistakable signal that they will play the war crimes card if necessary.

Personally I'd let Junior go back to Crawford and ride his bike. Enough of this shit.

[ThoughtCriminal]

1. Not if they still get to run things

Accountability matters.

[Ladyhawk]

2. No. More shit will happen if we don't nail these f*ckers. n/t

[Alcibiades]

3. He wouldn't go for it

and as much as I'd like to see it, I don't think the UN, the international Court of Justice, or anyone else could pull off a successful prosecution of a sitting American president for war crimes. Besides, this administration cannot be trusted to follow through on any withdrawal or other policy concessions.

After the next election, however, is a different story. Hang them then.

[wtmusic]

12. agree, I doubt he would go for it

However he'd be put on notice and it would open the topic for discussion. Once he's out, anything could happen:

"John Quigley, professor of international law at Ohio State University, told IPS that U.S. officials are potentially liable before the ICC. Normally, the ICC has jurisdiction only if one of two states is a party to the ICC statute, (1) the state in whose territory the act is committed, or (2) the state of which the alleged perpetrator is a national.

"Neither Iraq nor the United States is a party," Quigley said. "However, according to the ICC statute, with regard to a particular offense, it is open to the state in whose territory the act was committed, or the state of nationality of the alleged perpetrator, to file with the ICC a declaration that it does not object to the ICC taking the case," he said.

Quigley also pointed out that if such a declaration were filed, the ICC could take the case."

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/deen.php?articleid=2864

[Carolab]

4. NO. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

No exceptions. This is a man who has executed more people than any other governor in history and has caused the needless loss of life of over 100,000 people and the senseless maiming of tens of thousands more. Forgive and forget? What kind of a message does that send?

[rustydog]

5. You mean like:

Not executing a murderer if he tells where the body is buried?

[wtmusic]

8. Not even if it saved thousands of lives? nt

[walldude]

13. I think it's more like

not executing the murderer if he tells where he has 200,000 live people imprisoned who he was planning to kill over the next 5 years.

This is a tough question. It's also rhetorical. They won't give up power. It's going to have to be taken from them. But if I were convinced that no one else would die, and the neo's couldn't come back to power than yes I would let him go. Enough blood has already been spilled in his name.

[Whoa_Nelly]

6. No n/t

[grannylib]

7. as a Christian, I say yeah, go skin your knees some more, W.

As a pissed off American human, I say fuck THAT noise, make him and all the other hypocritical cowardly chickenhawk spoiled rich kids PAY and PAY and PAY and PAY and PAY, for this life AND the next.
Freeze all assets, sell everything, build Habitat and other low-income housing (he DOES want to 'encourage' an 'ownership society' - what a way to do it, eh??) and make the neo-con-men spend the rest of their lives working menial jobs at today's minimum wage.
Slap ankle bracelets on 'em until the day they die - track 'em and their activities to make sure they are not hanging out with the wrong crowd (i.e. rich people who might make their lives pleasant)

Really really really torn between forgiveness and make em fuckin' suffer the way others are suffering because of them.

[wtmusic]

24. Torn also

Although it's unlikely he'd go for it, it would be a bold step for the UN which would only empower them.

[Canuckistanian]

9. Depends

If he tried to start it again in Iran, I'd redouble my efforts.

If that was the end of it, then live and let live.

[BlueEyedSon]

10. What war crimes exemption are you talking about?

details and/or link, pls!

[wtmusic]

15. The US twisted arms at the UN in 2000

and got a three-year exemption from prosecution on war crimes.

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/deen.php?articleid=2625

[BlueEyedSon]

16. thanks

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. SHIP HIS CRIMINAL ASS TO THE HAGUE,,,,,NOW OR LATER

[Corgigal]

14. Yes

In fact I would.

Just don't ask me about the slackers non response on 9/11, that I can't forgive.

[yorkiemommie1]

17. Nope !

n/t

[boston bean]

18. Hell NO, he has caused too much death and destruction. eom

[bpilgrim]

19. NUTS!

peace

[tuvor]

20. What, like there's a mitigating factor?

In other words, no.

[wtmusic]

22. The mitigating factor

is that likely thousands of lives would be saved. Another possibility: he would never be prosecuted or be found innocent.

[tuvor]

28. Sorry, that's cutting a deal with the devil.

[wtmusic]

32. I hear ya

In the long term, possibly the VERY long term, I have to agree.

[lonestarnot]

21. Never gona let that fucker off for shit! NEVER!

[dweller]

23. BRING THE TROOPS HOME NOW!

and let them march him to the Hague, along with the accomplices.

Fate will play the last card.

dp

[Ready4Change]

25. No.

But, after this administration is removed from office, tried, and locked away in jail, I'll welcome our troops home with those flowers and waved flags they were promised so long ago.

[Mr_Spock]

26. No, though Bush is not all bad for us

Having a demented leader of their party is somewhat helpful to our side...

[Rabrrrrrr]

27. Absolutely not. That asshole criminal HAS to stand trial, he and

his entire cabal.

Even if it means sacrificing more of our troops, for the greater good, criminals like Shrubbie and his cabal absolutely have to be taken care of publicly, so the world can see it, and so the world can know that justice is being done; and that evil like this will never be tolerated.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. No

way too much blood has been spilled and tehy will never learn until they pay

[BulletproofLandshark]

30. No way

He needs to bring our troops home now, AND to stand trial for war crimes. Doing the right thing by bringing home our soldiers doesn't absolve the Bush administration of the crimes it's already responsible for.

[Spinzonner]

31. Only if he can bring back all the dead he's responsible for

and undo the maimings to the rest of the victims.

And pay the country for the billions he has wasted.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

33. we don't negotiate with terrorists

[wtmusic]

34. Great reply!

another Bushism twisting 180° and biting him in the ass