November 17, 2010

More On Bush's Torture (A View From The Outside)

Now that George Bush has admitted to torture and now (it seems) that the Obama administration is just as reluctant to prosecute (or even investigate) those war crimes as ever, the responsibility just now may fall to our overseas allies.

From Rue 89:
A total of 145 other countries, including Canada, are signatories to the U.N. Convention Against Torture. And all signatories have committed to enforcing its provisions, even against offenders residing in other territories.

Therefore, with varying degrees of success, proceedings have been initiated in Spain and Belgium against foreign heads of state, notably the Chilean Pinochet. Water boarding is now considered a form of torture worldwide, and those responsible must be prosecuted.
In fact, a court in Madrid last January opened proceedings against Bush advisors who wrote memos illegally authorizing the use of torture. The case is pending, but the issue was pursued precisely because no American authority took action against the officials responsible.

It's a safe bet that George W. Bush is now in the crosshairs of the Spain tribunal. If it were to condemn him, even in absentia, he would then be subject to the mutual extradition treaty in force among 24 European countries.

In other words, Bush couldn't travel to any of these countries without incurring the risk of being deported to Spain to serve out his sentence.
No one is above the law - not even presidents. That was the case when it came to lying about blowjobs, why isn't it the case when war crimes are involved?

Torture is illegal. Prosecute the torture. It's simple.


High Lord Inquisitor and Factchecker of 2PJ. said...

Since you like specifics.
Please cite for me when in history the leaders of the victors of a conflict were prosecuted for "War Crimes"?

Anonymous said...


Slobodan Milosevic.

High Lord Inquisitor and Factchecker of 2PJ. said...


victors of a conflict

So Slobodan Milosevic won the Kosovo War?
When did the UN/EU/Clinton surrender to him?

Dayvoe said...


What difference does this make? It's still illegal and a war crime.

Anonymous said...


When did Belgrade surrender? And, to whom?

Further, are you saying that victory=morality? That might really does make right?

Yes. Yes, you are.

EdHeath said...

HTTT, I should have responded earlier, but I was distracted by personal stuff.

I don't think there is a time when the victors in a conflict allowed any of their people to be prosecuted for war crimes. Which I think is a travesty of justice. I think if the United States wants to claim "American Exceptionalism" we need to walk the walk, and actually enforce laws when it is inconvenient for us. So if George Bush were prosecuted for "War Crimes", it would be a first in history.

I would settle for something like a letter of censure from Congress, personally. That would still be a first in history, I believe.