At least you have shown enough common sense that people really ought to be involved and speaking out on the myriad US illegal invasions, again, the equivalents of what WWII war criminals were hung for.
Can anyone suggest a logical reason that every US prez since WWII also shouldn't be hung, for they are war criminals all, as defined by Robert Jackson/Nuremberg, Tokyo War Crimes Trials?
I can suggest one good reason, those that are dead and buried need not be dug up and hung. The rest, those alive, of course, because the USA believes strongly in following the rule of law, in following the law they largely established in the WWII war crimes trials.
[bolded and enlarged in the following is mine]
"Unfortunately, the nature of these crimes is such that both prosecution and judgment must be by victor nations over vanquished foes. The worldwide scope of the aggressions carried out by these men has left but few real neutrals. Either the victors must judge the vanquished or we must leave the defeated to judge themselves. After the first World War, we learned the futility of the latter course. The former high station of these defendants, the notoriety of their acts, and the adaptability of their conduct to provoke retaliation make it hard to distinguish between the demand for a just and measured retribution, and the unthinking cry for vengeance which arises from the anguish of war. It is our task, so far as humanly possible, to, draw the line between the two. We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well. We must summon such detachment and intellectual integrity to our task that this Trial will commend itself to posterity as fulfilling humanity's aspirations to do justice." -- USSC Justice Robert H. Jackson
