Should Bush/Cheney be brought to trial in the U.S., The Hague, or Baghdad?

[Cyrano]

Even though Dems now control the congress, the fact is that Bush can veto anything they pass. And even if he were to be impeached by the House, the Senate doesn't have enough votes to remove him from office.

But indulge me in a moment of fantasy. Assuming that Bush/Cheney were ever to stand trial for their war crimes and their crimes against humanity, where should they be tried to ensure justice, and warn any future president that he/she will be held accountable?

My own choice would be the Hague, but our country has never recognized their authority. Nonetheless, I believe that this is perhaps the one place where justice can be found today. No death penalty, no lynchings, and no political agenda. Only a judgment of whether they are guilty or innocent of the charges.

[Norquist Nemesis]

1. All three of them! n/t

[tblue]

8. Yep, all three, consecutively. Let that be how they spend the remainder of their days.

[Gregorian]

2. Well, they'll be pardoned in the US. And Baghdad isn't even a real choice.

So it'll have to either be a civil suit or the Hague. And I doubt they'll meet Hague criteria.

Basically, they're going to walk free. It sucks.

The only compensation I get is knowing they're trapped within their own soulless bodies.

[Cyrano]

12. I'm not sure that the Hague "criteria" is. But it must be in the sewer if Bush/Cheney don't meet it.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

3. I say Baghdad.

For three and a half years, they've been telling us about how it's really getting better there. We've spread democracy to Iraq, right?

So . . . just have a nice, peaceful little trial--right outside the Green Zone.

[Lowell]

4. We recognized the Hague until 1986

then we assumed a pick and choose attitude to their work. Presently Justice Thomas Buergenthal represents the United States in that court.

I think we should send them to the Hague because that court actually has more credibility in the eyes of the rest of the world than either Baghdad or the US courts.

[stonecoldsober]

5. Couldn't we just hand them over to the dudes in the leather jackets?

[enid602]

6. military

I was thinking maybe the next time Bush and Cheney make a surprise visit to see the troops, maybe the military can just 'forget' to pick them up to take them back home.

[BuyingThyme]

7. The precedent is Baghdad.

[notadmblnd]

9. I think they should get their justice on the streets of Bagdad

and when the people are done with them, leave em for the wild dogs.

[AndyA]

10. I choose all of the above.

It's the only way justice will be served.

[bluewave]

11. Hague. Though I hate Bush/Cheney, no death penalty.

We don't need them as martyrs. And I oppose the DP.

[Orsino]

15. Yes.

Don't kill them. Expose their crimes in detail, and if they are convicted, make sure they can never kill again. Then sue them for reparations.

[jaksavage]

13. I like it except

It seems so unfair that the only suffering they would have is an infinite court battle. I'd take that over living in a fractured society or dying in one.

All the wars are looking so much the same.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. The Hague

for exactly the same reason they should have sent Sadam to the hague...

[Cyrano]

16. Bush/Cheney didn't want him in the Hague. The lynching of Hussein is a stain on our country's honor.

"We didn't do it. The Iraqi's did." is just one more huge pile of horse dung being put forth by Bush & Co. He was lynched because that's the way Bush/Cheney, war profiteers, and every other son-of-a-bitch power broker in our country wanted it that way.

Would they have wanted Hussein spouting off about how they had all done business with him in the past and the immense profits they made as a result?

Sometimes, you just have to be ashamed of the deeds that were committed in our name. And if this isn't one of those times, I don't know what is.

[mike_c]

17. The Hague-- the U.S. should rejoin the community of nations...

...that respects international law.