I have a question regarding the International Criminal Court.

[driver8]

I was speaking with a friend of mine last night who happens to be a law school professor. He teaches international law and, in his class, they have been discussing the Iraq war. He told me last night that George Bush could not be tried at the ICC because the United States is not a member (not sure if this is correct term.).

I looked at their website and the USA is not a member.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/statesparties.html

Does this mean that there is no hope for these fuckers to ever be charged with war crimes?

[SteppingRazor]

1. Correct, we are not members of the IC treaty.

Also correct, there is not, nor has there ever been, a chance in hell that an American president or any American official will ever be tried for war crimes.

[driver8]

2. Damn it!

I was afraid that someone would say that!!

Thanks for the reply -- I appreciate it.

[SteppingRazor]

4. No worries. As far as war crimes...

I think an even more basic fact than our lack of membership in the ICC treaty is that the winners write the history books. Would Caesar be put on trial for massacring Gauls? Would the British be put on trial for firebombing Dresden? The list goes on and on -- the only people who ever face trial for war crimes are the people who lose a war. And even if we -- God willing -- pull out of Iraq soon, it still doesn't mean we've truly lost a war. After all, no one's occupying America.

[ck4829]

3. It's correct, but it's ironic because the US has tried it's enemies in court before

Nuremberg, executing Japanese soldiers for waterboarding our soldiers, getting Manuel Noriega, the trial of Saddam Hussein (it was most likely a sham trial), etc.

[SteppingRazor]

5. All of those trials are pre-ICC, except Saddam.

And, of course, Saddam was tried in Iraq by Iraqis, not in an international court.