SwiftVets.com

[Greenhat]

[sparky]

The point was that conservatives agree: the ICC defines "war criminal" vaguely and broadly.

Hardly " universal" as you're claiming in your effort to smear Kerry. "War crimes" are subject to debate and not something easily settled, determined, or agreed upon.

Whether it was constitutional or not isn't the point I'm arguing.

[sparky]

[Greenhat]

[Greenhat]

[sparky]

Nah. The wording may be accepted widely, but the interpretation of that wording isn't.

BushCorp Inc. was clear in not wanting US troops held to what it considered vague and broad standards and definitions of "war crime."

Much of the world has signed on to the Rome Statute of the ICC. 143 nations, in fact. The US exemption is described in the second link

http://www.iccnow.org/countryinfo/worldsigsandratifications.html

http://www.iccnow.org/countryinfo/theamericas/unitedstates.html

[Greenhat]

193 nations in the world, of which 93 have actually ratified the ICC.

The US is on the signitory list. Didn't you notice?
_________________
De Oppresso Liber

[DannyH]

In the interview with Alan Colmes this week, John Kerry said:

"But that doesn't change the impact of what has happened in that prison through our own efforts, which have put American troops at greater risk, put Americans at greater risk, tarnished all of us and, I think, been a great disservice to the effort that we have been engaged in over there. I will fight a more effective war on terror, because I would never have thrown out of the door or window the obligations of the Geneva Conventions. Why? Because I know, as a former combatant, that, had I been captured, I would have wanted our moral high ground with respect to those Geneva Conventions to be in place. "

But on April 18, 1971, on the nationally televised MEET THE PRESS, during a time while the U.S. was at war and American POWs were imprisoned in North Vietnam, John Kerry said:

JOHN KERRY: "There are all kinds of atrocities and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed... ...All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. "

By his own claim he damned himself, as he willingly put American POWs lives in danger back in 1971. That he lied and implied that war atrocities were official U.S. doctrine put the American POWs in even further danger. Kerry needs to be held accountable.

[DannyH]

I'm guessing that Alan Colmes had to be shaking his head at that one, knowing that even though Kerry had a friendly interviewer ready to make him look good, Kerry still managed to stick his foot right into a land mine with a big red "DON'T STEP HERE' sign on it.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[ROTC DAD]

Navy_Navy_Navy,

Maybe you missed the fact that the Administration knew that torture was going on in their military prison system since at least January of this year and didn't do anything about it other than ignore the report when they got it.

It's amazing, but just about every official publication of the military press is calling for heads to roll in the chain of command, but on this forum torturers and their commanders are being defended!

[Greenhat]

[ROTC DAD]

Greenhat,

That's fine, except your assertion explains nothing. What do you consider it when the Red Cross tells the Provisional Authority in Iraq that US soldiers are torturing Iraqis, 90% of whom it appears were just picked up on random sweeps, The Pentagon is notified, the WH is notified, an investigation is begun which produces a report about abuse, but not only is nothing done to stop the abuse, the organizations which supposedly requested the report have yet to read it when it breaks in the news, even though General Myers was given two extra weeks before the story broke to read the damn thing?

Now it turns out there is a memo penned by Gonzales which calls certain aspects of the Geneva Convention "quaint" and open to a more liberal interpretation. So where does the line get drawn?

[Greenhat]

Ever conducted a criminal investigation under UCMJ guidelines, ROTCD?

It is a time consuming process, and one that is very specifically laid out. Failure to do it properly? Could mean all those people walk. As it is? Some have/will because the process was rushed.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber

[ROTC DAD]

Greenhat,

Rushed? I think you're reaching here. This is the usual answer given when a bureaucracy is shown not to have done right.