• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump is now a war criminal

jimbo said:
I call it the Bush action for lack of a better term. Police action is incorrect. War is a term never used by our government. Perhaps we need a new term, or recognize what it is when nations start shooting at each other.

Bush did the right thing when he went to Congress for authorization. At best you could call it Congress's war.

Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, or the nutty professor and his band had no jurisdiction regarding the matter, so no, they did not follow international rules. Calling me ignorant does not change that.

So, to a quedtion regarding international law. You believe the mock trial was legal under national law. That the so called trial found them guilty is a given. Bush and the rest have not gone into hiding, so why haven't those found guilty in absentia been picked up and the execution performed? I'll help. Because the international community did not buy into the argument any more than I do.

In any event, the tribunal or whatever you want to call it has pronounced sentence and carried it out. Their names have been duly entered in the roster they keep. So the story is now a footnote in the history books.
Click to expand...

I don't think there was a sentence handed down. The conviction, but no sentence.

From the beginning it was clear that the trial was essentially a formality. The conviction was registered under a rule to which the US is NOT signatory. There is no warrant at INTERPOL. I've read that some countries, Switzerland for one, want to question Bush & Cheney, so for that reason those 2 do not travel to certain countries.

US war criminals are well protected by the system.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I don't think there was a sentence handed down. The conviction, but no sentence.

From the beginning it was clear that the trial was essentially a formality. The conviction was registered under a rule to which the US is NOT signatory. There is no warrant at INTERPOL. I've read that some countries, Switzerland for one, want to question Bush & Cheney, so for that reason those 2 do not travel to certain countries.

US war criminals are well protected by the system.
Click to expand...

I believe by their own admission the only sentence they could enforce was writing the names in a book. They did that. Case closed.

I'm not aware of any reason that Bush, Cheney, or the others avoid certain countries for any reason other than having no desire to go there. I could be wrong. Just never heard it.
 
to be a war criminal-invariably one has to first LOSE the war.
 
jimbo said:
I believe by their own admission the only sentence they could enforce was writing the names in a book. They did that. Case closed.

I'm not aware of any reason that Bush, Cheney, or the others avoid certain countries for any reason other than having no desire to go there. I could be wrong. Just never heard it.
Click to expand...

No, you won't hear that on MSM, for sure. It was several years back that Bush had to forego a trip to Switzerland, and the MSM would never mention anything like that.
 
TurtleDude said:
to be a war criminal-invariably one has to first LOSE the war.
Click to expand...

I don't understand that.If I want to murder someone but I don't succeed, because I was prevented to kill by police intervention or whatever, I am no murderer??

Hmmm. but maybe I understand you wrong.
 
Pin dÁr said:
I don't understand that.If I want to murder someone but I don't succeed, because I was prevented to kill by police intervention or whatever, I am no murderer??

Hmmm. but maybe I understand you wrong.
Click to expand...

Because the winners in most conflicts end up writing the history, they get to tell the story for posterity. They also get to convene any judicial proceedings. To the victor goes the spoils, and he will certainly not mention his own crimes for posterity.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Because the winners in most conflicts end up writing the history, they get to tell the story for posterity. They also get to convene any judicial proceedings. To the victor goes the spoils, and he will certainly not mention his own crimes for posterity.
Click to expand...

ok, that makes it clear! Thanks!
 
Thoreau72 said:
Because the winners in most conflicts end up writing the history, they get to tell the story for posterity. They also get to convene any judicial proceedings. To the victor goes the spoils, and he will certainly not mention his own crimes for posterity.
Click to expand...

I think that was obvious but thanks for posting it since at least one poster missed it
 
Pin dÁr said:
ok, that makes it clear! Thanks!
Click to expand...

The Russians committed as many war crimes in WWII as the Nazis but Russian generals were not held accountable.
 
sangha said:
Irrelevant.

Whether or not Assad is a war criminal has no bearing on whether Trump is one
Click to expand...

Oh. But it does. Theory has it that at we all have a r2p. How this should be handled is still being debated among lawyers. But to prevent further crimes against humanity there is good precedent to acting. I realize that you would rather side with the dictator, but I think that rather revolting.
 
joG said:
Oh. But it does. Theory has it that at we all have a r2p. How this should be handled is still being debated among lawyers. But to prevent further crimes against humanity there is good precedent to acting. I realize that you would rather side with the dictator, but I think that rather revolting.
Click to expand...

This suggests you would side with the pathological liar rather than the dictator? I'm getting confused....:confused:
 
Thoreau72 said:
This suggests you would side with the pathological liar rather than the dictator? I'm getting confused....:confused:
Click to expand...

The dictator is certainly a liar.
 
joG said:
The dictator is certainly a liar.
Click to expand...

Please, do show a wee bit of honesty. Trump is a pathological liar. In this he is not much different than any US president. The US has been trying to overthrow the government of Syria for many years. That is thee definition of terrorism, in everyone's book.

The US is the largest terrorist organization the world has ever seen. It was doing terrorism long before it co-opted the word to fill in for "communist".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom