Bangkoktraveler Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I doubt war crime trials will ever happen. The Democrats seem to be less inclined to such behavior whereas the Republicans will waste an inate amount of time and money to such causes. When Pres. Bush first took office in 2001 there were some on the right who demanded investigations and prosecutions of the various malefactors in the Clinton Administration. Pres. Bush wisely dismissed such calls and simply moved forward to implement his own agenda. Obama will be wise to follow suit. I hope you are not trying to claim the Bush and the Clinton administration are very similar? Clinton did not do the crap that Bush has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaiHome Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Why not war crimes trials for GWB and the others responsible for allowing it to happen in the first place? I donâ??t think anything Bush and cronies did would qualify as war crimes. What I would like to see are full open Congressional Hearings on how we got to the point of invading Iraq and people being held accountable for their actions. TH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Clinton did not do the crap that Bush has done. Clinton was impeached and disbarred so I would say that it is Pres. Bush who has not done the crap that Clinton has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 What I would like to see are full open Congressional Hearings on how we got to the point of invading Iraq and people being held accountable for their actions. We already had one of those. How many do we need? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rchapstick Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Clinton did not do the crap that Bush has done. Clinton was impeached and disbarred so I would say that it is Pres. Bush who has not done the crap that Clinton has done. How right you are RY. He had the audacity to get a blow job from a skank, and then he ... gawd forbid ... denied it! Yea, thank goodness Chancey only tanked the economy and got us into a meaningless war. What a swell guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Clinton did not do the crap that Bush has done. Clinton was impeached and disbarred so I would say that it is Pres. Bush who has not done the crap that Clinton has done. How right you are RY. He had the audacity to get a blow job from a skank' date=' and then he ... gawd forbid ... denied it! Yea, thank goodness Chancey only tanked the economy and got us into a meaningless war. What a swell guy![/quote'] Can you imagine the cunt never washed the cum stained dress but kept it hung up in her closet? Damn those were really bad times, wasn't it? [LOL] Now Bush on the other hand has done such a good job! Just look at our economy? The number of jobs created? Industry booming? The surpluses in the National Debt and need we say what a fine job he has done in balancing the budget? Even in Iraq, every home has a picture of GWB in their home, that is, if they have a home. They even say the Pledge of Allegiance 4 times a day in honor of GWB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 "But many nations have resisted Bush administration efforts to repatriate the prisoners back home" Let's all hold hands and sing. Words can stop bomb blasts. Hide under the bed and be scared like a good little Republican... If the people in Gitmo were guilty of something, they'd be tried by now, since the US is desperate to have at least a couple of convictions (still waiting on those ). Why do Republicans claim to love America, but hate all she stands for? We have an accepted way of dealing with people whom we do not have enough untainted evidence to convict: we release them. Some of the people we release are guilty, and some are very dangerous: Mafia bosses, murderers, rapists, people who beat up their spouses or molest their children. We have always thought that maintaining our commitment to the rule of law meant that despite these dangers, we should not lock people up if we don't have evidence against them that's admissible in court. That's what decent societies do. Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 SD, it should be easy to find each and every one of these prisoners guilty - they aren't allowed to defend themselves. But the government just can ot even be able to do even that. I find by imprisoning these people, it has undermined everything the USA used to stand for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted January 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Sort of like FDR and the Japanese-Americans in 1942? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lazyphil Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 SD, America has never been a decent society, i can cite many reasons why from the day of conception but i'll spare you the gory details you know already (slavery etc). Dont get me wrong, i value america though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.