Canada to indict Bush for war crimes?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Mudbug, Nov 16, 2004.

  1. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #2
    Beyond Canada's laws, there are many like myself that feel he should be held for war crimes.

    I am too young to remember Truman, but I am sure there are some of us given the time might feel that he was a war criminal.
     
  2. Hemingray macrumors 68030

    Hemingray

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Location:
    Ha ha haaa!
    #3
    Hah! I'd like to see it. Canada couldn't pull it off.

    And that's my ever-so-humble opinion. ;)
     
  3. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #4
    Why not, he did go to war over imaginary WMDs.
     
  4. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #5
    Yea, that would work. I could see the folks there trying to apprehend the President, and then all of them getting smoked by the Secret Service.

    Never will happen, never would happen. The Canadian government doesn't have the ball to try something this stupid.
     
  5. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #6
    It would be more symbolic than anything else. Like a bench warrant or something. If GWB starts drinking again after his term is up and wanders into Canada by mistake they might pick him up on it.
     
  6. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #7

    Now that is funny! :D
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    So might continues to be right? Doing the right thing is "stupid"? The Law belongs to the victor? Bush is above the law? The US is above the law? Which of the above?
     
  8. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #9

    Um, no to all of the above. You cannot hold the President responsible for isolated events in the field of battle. That is just crazy. To claim that he violated international law by invading Iraq. Nope. Saddam had violated the cease fire of the 1st gulf war, and thus, this could be argued was a reactivation of actions.

    Or as it was once said, "the president reserves the right to act unilaterally if need be to defend this country against a tyrant like Sadam Hussain." -- John Kerry.
     
  9. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #10
    Everybody says somebody should be prosecuted for war crimes, as they sit back and watch the bodies stack up in the mass graves, because they are unwilling to send their troops into an area and bring them to justice without the UN behind them.

    It's sit back and wait for the UN to act, and we all know how quick they are.

    Of course detaining the US President for trial would bring about some interesting military action that would probably end up with the US capturing more oil fields :p and leave Cheney in charge. :eek:

    It's all probably a rumor made up by Halliburton in their effort to take over North America. :eek:
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    I'm not. I'm holding him responsible for falsifying the evidence in order to try to justify an aggressive war which has cost upwards of 100,000 lives, for failing to protect the civilian population, for failing to protect Iraq's cultural heritage, for allowing and condoning serial breaches of the Geneva Convention. A "reactivation of actions"? What kind of crap is that? Does that excuse flattening cities, murdering civilians and shutting down water supplies? This is some rebuilding effort.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    Wasn't Hitler going to be tried for a 'reactivation of actions' left over from WWI if he hadn't offed himself? ;)
     
  12. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    Okay trivia fans, Michael Moore has made only one fiction feature film (no wisecracks, you know what I mean). What is the name, and the plot?

    (I promise, this is relevant to the thread.)
     
  13. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #14
    I'm glad we all agree it was fiction... :D

    However, he is planning a new fictional film about the same subject. :rolleyes:
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Hmm, so you don't know the answer? Somebody must.
     
  15. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #16
    You're a real Sicko, it's in the db.

    Except for his recently announced future film.
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #18
    Of course it is, but that would be cheating.
     
  17. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #19
    The way Cheney has continued to misrepresent the facts, he ought to have his sanity put on trial.
     
  18. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #20
    I'm sorry, I thought this thread had to be satire with a title like that.

    I guess I do not give Canada the respect she deserves.

    Still with Global Warming and large shale-oil reserves, Canada may have the last laugh...
     
  19. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #21
    Damn, I thought that was the non-fiction docudrama people kept talking about.
     
  20. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #22
    Only if you have to happen to be a GOP President. :eek:
     
  21. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #23
    Yet Saddam was held for the actions of his troops at his direction. Spin it your way, in the end 20+ years from now GWB will be seen as the criminal that he is.
     
  22. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #24
    Amen! Bush is no better than Saddam. The results are an end to the means. Whether it was killing his own people, or the killing of ones own people. The result is just wrong, particularly with the lies the GWB gave. God have mercy on his soul....
     
  23. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #25
    That would be the GWB I and GWB II eras as non-fiction. Great stories spun so far......
     

Share This Page