Enjoy unlimited access to all forum features for FREE! Optional upgrade available for extra perks.

Bush to be arrested?

Status
Not open for further replies.

beatz

Cool Member
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Messages
1,837
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0
Hi,

not domain but legal-related:

I just saw a law professor on TV who said if the US is going to invade Iraq for real without a UN legitimation, that

a) this would be a war crime
b) Bush could be arrested and accused for that in Europe (Den Haag) once he's not president anymore and comes to Europe.

Nonsense or truth?

Any lawyer wanna comment?
 
Domain Summit 2024

Fearless

Level 9
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2002
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
22
Feedback: 28 / 0 / 0
Now that would start WWIII. Americans respect the presidency, past or present.
 

beatz

Cool Member
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Messages
1,837
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0
Heh,

the point is that not *that* will start WWIII but if the US decides to start the war on Iraq.
I tell you *then* WWIII will have begun.
As for the respect to presidency - war crime is war crime, president or not.
 

Drewbert

Level 5
Legacy Gold Member
Joined
May 6, 2002
Messages
467
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
>Americans respect the presidency, past or present.

Is he above the law, or something?

What about Nixon?
 

Anthony Ng

@Nameslave
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
May 22, 2002
Messages
4,567
Reaction score
14
Feedback: 16 / 0 / 0
Originally posted by gregr
Now that would start WWIII. Americans respect the presidency, past or present.
Milosevic WAS the president of Yugoslavia. You need to be somebody to be tried in the Hague. LOL!
 

peter

Level 9
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
17
Feedback: 16 / 0 / 0
Originally posted by nameslave

Milosevic WAS the president of Yugoslavia. You need to be somebody to be tried in the Hague. LOL!

exactly. Oh man, t'would be GREAT if bush was to be tried as well.
 

octobus

DNF Regular
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 27 / 0 / 0
The Court would first vaporize :D
 

timechange.com

Level 9
Legacy Gold Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
2,603
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
My suggestion: lounge or not lounge, let's keep religion and politics out. Many people have strong views on both. Why ruin the DNF environment?
 

Nexus

DNF Addict
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2002
Messages
1,495
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0
Similar murmurs were floated about Henry Kissinger regarding events in East Timor and elsewhere. I remember listening to an interview with him on NPR. When he got asked the question I could *feel* him turn red and get pissed (maybe he thought he'd had a pre-interview agreement...?) The Village Voice called him the Manhattan Milosovec ( read ).

I think talking about a standing president like that (preparing for when he gets out) is nuts. It would certainly be a precident setting move (though we are certainly experiencing historic events). There are however other agendas afoot for "unseating" Bush (just like Tony Blaire). Getting very messy.

A lot of unrest out there. :(

~ Nexus
 

DaddyHalbucks

Domain Buyer
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
3,142
Reaction score
18
Feedback: 70 / 0 / 0
The law professor is an idiot. Does he teach at an Ivy League school? Probably. LOL.

Iraq invaded Kuwait and raped its women. Iraq gassed its own citizens/ civilians with nerve agents. Iraq targetted and shot at coalition airplanes enforcing the UN no fly zones. Iraq developed WMD against international law. Iraq tried to assasinate the President of the United States!

Iraq went against the UN for 12 years.

The US has a right to self-protection. A dictator with WMD is a threat to our national security.

Technology has changed principles of law that were valid for thousands of years.

President George W. Bush may deserve a Nobel peace prize for this initiative. He will be the liberator of Iraq!

Anybody who thinks that such a coup/ revolution/ reform can be without bloodshed, is naive. Saddam Hussein is one of the world's most criminal, ruthless, and dangerous men.

He...LLO!!!!!??

Anybody Home?!!!!!!

To the nutty professor and all the other peace lovers, I say..

1. Were you asleep on 9/11?
2. WAKE UP NOW! --*before* a chemical warhead lands in Tel Aviv or Paris or New York or London, an event which would make 9/11 look like a fire drill.
 

DomainGoon

Level 4
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2002
Messages
219
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 2 / 0 / 0
Originally posted by DotComCowboy
The law professor is an idiot. Does he teach at an Ivy League school? Probably. LOL.

Iraq invaded Kuwait and raped its women. Iraq gassed its own citizens/ civilians with nerve agents. Iraq targetted and shot at coalition airplanes enforcing the UN no fly zones. Iraq developed WMD against international law. Iraq tried to assasinate the President of the United States!

Iraq went against the UN for 12 years.

The US has a right to self-protection. A dictator with WMD is a threat to our national security.

Technology has changed principles of law that were valid for thousands of years.

President George W. Bush may deserve a Nobel peace prize for this initiative. He will be the liberator of Iraq!

Anybody who thinks that such a coup/ revolution/ reform can be without bloodshed, is naive. Saddam Hussein is one of the world's most criminal, ruthless, and dangerous men.

He...LLO!!!!!??

Anybody Home?!!!!!!

To the nutty professor and all the other peace lovers, I say..

1. Were you asleep on 9/11?
2. WAKE UP NOW! --*before* a chemical warhead lands in Tel Aviv or Paris or New York or London, an event which would make 9/11 look like a fire drill.

For suggesting Bush deserves a Nobel prize, you win an award too, a Darwin Award.
 

edisaacson

Level 3
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I agree, we have our #1 Darwin candidate for 2003.

I was within a 1/2 mile of the WTC when it was destroyed. Doesn't change the fact that there has been no link proven between Iraq and what happened that day.

Preemptive strikes set a bad worldwide precedent. How can we speak out against North Korea or Pakistan striking out at their neighbors when we are doing the same thing, on a much larger scale. Simple fact is that Iraq has not attacked us and has not made any overt threats against us. W doesn't like the fact that Saddam embarrassed his daddy and he's looking for revenge.

Anyone else in the US troubled that our economy is no where near recovery, but we are pledging near a billion dollars to rebuild Iraq after this is over.
 

peter

Level 9
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
17
Feedback: 16 / 0 / 0
however (please correct me if I'm wrong), but I a pretty sure that USA does NOT recognize HAAG as an internation court, and if it anyways would try bush, it has to have the agreement of ALL of the following countries:

france, russia, england, germany AND USA ITSELF

in other words I don't think it could happen.

But as I said, please correct me if I am wrong
 

DaddyHalbucks

Domain Buyer
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
3,142
Reaction score
18
Feedback: 70 / 0 / 0
Ed,

Who cares where you were on 9/11?

Again, since you appear not to be following:

If Saddam Hussein explodes a chemical warhead in Tel Aviv or Paris or New York or London, it will make 9/11 look like a fire drill.

Technology has changed warfare. A pre-emptive strike could be the difference between 100,000+ US citizens living or dying.

Rogues no longer use crossbows! A chemical weapon in the hands of 1 outlaw/ terrorist can kill hundreds of thousands of people.. at a pop.

WAKE UP!
 

peter

Level 9
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
17
Feedback: 16 / 0 / 0
the cowboy is right, and is one of the few on this board who shares my view on this war.
 

RON2

@domainbuyer
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2002
Messages
1,550
Reaction score
9
Feedback: 24 / 0 / 0
Originally posted by timechange.com
My suggestion: lounge or not lounge, let's keep religion and politics out. Many people have strong views on both. Why ruin the DNF environment?

Agreed! :rolleyes:
 

system0

Level 8
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2002
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 11 / 0 / 0
i have to disagree with the majority of views on this thread

what right does the uk and us have to police the world - this is an invasion of a country - not a pre emptive strike

north korea has said it will attack america and they have nuclear weaponds which can reach the west coast of america - so why is iraq being attacked

iraq has no connections with al queada - saddam killed the kurds - because they were muslim - just like bin laden

saddam is an evil evil man and he shouldnt be in power - i totally agree with this - but we are not the police of the world and its sickening that 100,000s of innoccent people will die in this war - whilst nothing happens about zimbabwe, north korea os israel/palestine

israel tanks killed 13 innocent people yesterday - including a 4 year old girl and a 13 year old boy - why wasnt this mentioned in bushs or blairs speech

the whole thing stinks of hypocricy in my opinion - people need to rethink why these countries want to attack us

i know this is contriversal but i dont know how anyone can justify the innocent slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people including children, babies and woman whilst the un are disarming saddam

no wonder tony blair is losing cabinet ministers - hes more right wing than tory now
 

draqon

Level 8
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2002
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
"israel tanks killed 13 innocent people yesterday - including a 4 year old girl and a 13 year old boy - why wasnt this mentioned in bushs or blairs speech"


Innocent? Hahahahaa. Those were armed terrorists being killed. Obviously two or three of those people were civilians, like the civilian children, but that is collateral damage. If anything Israel and America should be blamed for not killing more members of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, etc.
 

edisaacson

Level 3
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Cowboy,

The issue is that pre-emptive strikes is a very dangerous territory to get into. So we eliminate Saddam, then who's next, North Korea? Then depending on the whims of the President, maybe Syria? People are not realizing that this vendetta against Iraq is personal to W., nothing more. If he is successful in Iraq, who knows who else he will decide is a "threat". There has been absolutely no evidence that Iraq has had or will ever have any intention of attacking us. Why don't we attack India? They have WMD's. What makes them any less of a threat? How about Israel? Plenty of WMD's and a government that seems to be in chaos. Under Bush's definition, they would be a "threat" also.
 

system0

Level 8
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2002
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 11 / 0 / 0
this is a genuine letter which was sent by terry jones

(sorry cant be bothered removing the >>)

>A letter to the London Observer from Terry Jones (yes, of Monty Python).
>
>Letter to the Observer - Sunday January 26, 2003
>
>I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's
>running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really
>pissed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.
>
>Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both
>give me, queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty
>for me,but so far I haven't been able to discover what.
>
>I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's
>got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel,
>don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources that he is,
>in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that
>if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one.
>
>Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police?
>But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence
>of a crime with which to charge my neighbours. They'll come up with endless
>red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike
>and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible
>things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.
>
>Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of
>automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until
>recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has
>made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can
>wade in and do whatever I want!
>
>And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards
>Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The
>one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the
>US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened
>us.
>
>That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and
>children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in
>peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way. Mr Bush
>makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam
>is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even if
>no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for
>killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr
>Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating
>'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because
>how can you ever know when you've achieved it?
>
>How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single
>terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's
>committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the
>ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists,
>being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves.
>
>Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future
>terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every
>Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might convert
>to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr
>Bush to eliminate all Muslims? It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and
>Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people
>in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd
>ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife
>says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same
>logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up. Like Mr
>Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the
>President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two
>weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and
>interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist
>masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you',
>I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come.
>
>It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in
>contrast to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.
>
>
>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Rule #1

Do not insult any other member. Be polite and do business. Thank you!

Sedo - it.com Premiums

IT.com

Premium Members

AucDom
UKBackorder
Be a Squirrel
MariaBuy

New Threads

Our Mods' Businesses

URL Shortener
UrlPick.com

*the exceptional businesses of our esteemed moderators

Top Bottom