'Bout Damn Time

[filkertom]

Gee, now BushCo says all their prisoners should be treated according to the Geneva Conventions. I bet Rummy and Alberto are having a good cry right about now.

So, given that they've now reversed their policy, what do you think: Should members of the Bush Administration, from Dubya on down, be held accountable for war crimes?

Comments

[bigtig.livejournal.com]

Pesky thing.

"War" crimes require a war. Which hasn't been declared.

Sad to say, but thanks to everyone twisting logic, they aren't special.

They're plain old everyday criminals.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Ahhhh, but he's a war president. There's a war on. He's made a point of saying that, numerous times.

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

They aren't reversing their policy. They're rewriting history.

[filkerdave.livejournal.com]

Retconning is an old and honorable tradition.

[giza.livejournal.com]

> There's a war on.

In that case, Get Your War On

[delayra.livejournal.com]

But the President doesn't have the power to declare war. Only the Congress has that power -- the President has the power to wage war

[don-tzu.livejournal.com]

Oh, I look at my wage and can tell someone's making war on me.

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes... when someone asks me how I feel about the war, I say, "we're not at war." Confuses people for some reason.

[orawnzva.livejournal.com]

Then they should be treated like plain old everyday criminals, which is to say they should be held in plain old everyday prisons, have access to plain old everyday lawyers, and be tried in plain old everyday courts. Our system of justice does not admit a category of "people so dangerous that the rules of the system of justice do not apply to them".

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

That's been bothering me for quite some time now...

Believe it or not...

[scruffycritter.livejournal.com]

No.

If reversing field means they get held accountable for war crimes, that feeds into their paranoia that they can never admit they do anything wrong ever, and WE WANT THEM TO STOP DOING THAT.

That being said,just because they werent "legally" POW's before doesn't mean they can't be victims of crimes against humanity.

So first things first. The Red Cross/Crescent inspect the facilities at Gitmo and documents abuse. Then we take next steps as appropriate.

I never thought Amnesty Intl would be needed to change the actions of my own govt.

Re: Believe it or not...

[mneme]

Eh. They're not admitting they did wrong -- they're responding to a lost court case that says they did. That's fine, but it doesn't remove libility for damage done.

[darthparadox.livejournal.com]

That memo didn't happen to come with a signing statement, did it?

[kengr]

Should members of the Bush Administration, from Dubya on down, be held accountable for war crimes?

If they've committed war crimes, sooner or later they'll be held accountable. If only in history books. One can hope it will be sooner than that.

Pardon my language, but...

[jmthane.livejournal.com]

Should members of the Bush Administration, from Dubya on down, be held accountable for war crimes?

HELL FUCKING YES!!!!!

[holzman.livejournal.com]

Of course they should be held accountable for war crimes: A murderer does not get let off the hook for having committed murders because they announce they will no longer commit murder.

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

I believe the implication of the Supreme Court ruling is that yes, they could theoretically be held accountable.

Note that most war crime trials against senior government officials have occurred after popular uprisings have removed said officials from power.

[jss]

Regardless of the article and the policy statement (whether it's change or revisionism): Should they be? Yes. Will they be? Probably not.

[realtegan.livejournal.com]

Should members of the Bush Administration, from Dubya on down, be held accountable for war crimes?

Absolutely. Bush is a traitor, and he and all his accomplices need to spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison to make up for the thousands of lives they intentionally destroyed.

Unfortunately, I have my doubts that he'll ever be punished. If he does get charged and convicted, I'm certain that he'll pull a Ken Lay and get out of it that way. I don't want Bush to die. I want him to suffer for the soldiers and civilians he's murdered by his illegal and immoral actions.

A nice bit of weaselling...

[lizard-sf.livejournal.com]

From the article:
""The memo that went out, it doesn't indicate a shift in policy," he said. "It just announces the decision of the court.""

This, to me, sounds like:"Hey! We're not *supposed* to do this anymore. So try to keep it more on the QT, savvy?"

[louisadkins.livejournal.com]

I don't care if it's War Crimes, Crimse vs. Humanity, or what - I just want them held reasonably accountable. (5 days community service, for example, would not be reasonable... it would be a joke, and a possible PR spin)

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Rummy doesn't have time to cry. He's too busy in Afghanistan saying how we have to defeat the Taliban...

Again.

[naja-pallida.livejournal.com]

Maybe we should have actually done it in the first place, instead of just SAYING we did it. :)

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

What's that? You mean President Good-ol-boy didn't "git r done"?

[don-tzu.livejournal.com]

I thought the U.S. had refused to accept the jurisdiction of foreign courts in such cases. If that is correct, then there is zero chance of such a trial because there is no way such charges could be brought in a Republican controlled government (Executive, Legislative, and arguably the Judicial since his last appointment to the Supreme Court).

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

Sure. And can you guess how much I believe this? I expect tre order as given will be more of the form "treated *winkwink* according to the Geneva *wink* Conventions *winkwink* (butwewon'tbewatchingallthatcloselysodon'tworry)."

Here's the thing that makes me sick to my stomach--it shouldn't ever even be a question that the US should fully and completely adhere to the letter and the spirit of the Geneva Conventions. If this announcement marks a reversal of policy, that means Dumbass is admitting to committing war crimes.

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

Word of the Bush administration's stance came as the Senate Judiciary Committee opened hearings Tuesday on the Guantanamo issue -- which is testing unity among Republicans on Capitol Hill, with lawmakers trying to decide in an election season how military detainees should be tried and what their rights should be

With a little bit of emphasis, probably the most telling statement in the article.

[dandelion-diva.livejournal.com]

Oh, absolutely. It won't happen, but it damn well *should*.

Gessi