Assuming that bush is a war criminal, does that make John Kerry

[cali]

and all the rest of the Congress critters who voted for the Iraq fiasco, war criminals too? Congress authorized the President to use "all means necessary".

[ret5hd]

1. Yes.

[robdogbucky]

30. Except Bob Byrd and the Immortal 23

"...The foremost voice of restraint in Congress was Senator Robert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, the longest serving senator in U. S. history, first elected in 1958. His eloquent opposition to this momentous resolution is vividly captured in Body of War:

“This is a real blotch on the Congress and the Chief Executive of the United States forever, for having cast a political vote to send our men and women to war and to possible death in a country that never attacked us, a country that never invaded us, a country that did not, I say. did not then, and does not now, constitute a threat to my country.

I stood and 22 other senators stood with me. No, we will not turn over this power to declare war which the Constitution says Congress shall have — the power to declare war. Article One, Section Eight. So that was no problem to me. I stood by the Constitution, I’m proud of it. And there were 23 of us. The immortal 23.”

In the final riveting scene, the two streams of the film come together, as Tomas visits Senator Byrd in his office on Capitol Hill. Together, they review the historic Senate vote and read aloud the names of the “Immortal 23” who stood against the war..."

http://www.bodyofwar.com/synopsis.php

[ProSense]

2. Wait

Assuming?

What brought this on?

Are you trying to defend Bush or smear Kerry?

Bush got an authorization to continue the inspections, exhaust diplomacy and provide evidence of WMD. He lied.

[1620rock]

3. They believed the fake Intel.

[ProSense]

7. There were

several resolutions based on the fake intel, and every member of Congress voted for at least one of them.

[boppers]

4. What was the name of the bill.

Simple question.

What. Was. The. Name. Of. The. Bill.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/content-detail.html

[cali]

5. huh?

Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq,

[boppers]

10. The point in contention:

"Bush got an authorization to continue the inspections, exhaust diplomacy and provide evidence of WMD."

The very name of the bill contradicts that.

[RickFromMN]

6. I suspect many in Congress were duped. An interesting question would be, who, knew the truth.

If they knew the truth, they should share the same fate as Bush.

What punishment we give to those who were duped is difficult to say.
If they were not negligent in their duties, it's hard to punish them.
If they were negligent, they deserve some amount of culpability.

A follow-up question, for me to answer, is the following:
were the Congress people, who were duped,
negligent, and therefore somewhat culpable,
because they let this policy get rammed through?
It's subjective, to me, how to answer the question,
if we are convinced we must pass legislation quickly,
how fast is too fast. I can't argue we should never act quickly.
Then again, does legislation passed quickly usually lead to bad results?

[spanone]

8. remember that the wmd thingy was a lie....fabricated.

[cali]

12. yeah, but there was a cornocopia of evidence contradicting the lie

I had it. So did the congress.

[Vattel]

19. For someone less knowledgeable than you on the topic,

can you recommend a source that compiles the evidence to which you refer?

[ProSense]

28. Is that

why all the resolutions mentioned the lie about WMD? Here are three, with the votes

To authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces, pursuant to a new resolution of the United Nations Security Council, to destroy, remove, or render harmless Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons-usable material, long-range ballistic missiles, and related facilities, and for other purposes.

link

To amend the authorization for the use of the Armed Forces to cover an imminent threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction rather than the continuing threat posed by Iraq.

link

To provide a termination date for the authorization of the use of the Armed Forces of the United States, together with procedures for the extension of such date unless Congress disapproves the extension.

link

All would have given Bush conditional authorization, and he would have violated all of them.

[boppers]

15. Devil's in the details.

Saddam had a WMD program: True
Saddam used WMD in war: True
Saddam kicked out WMD inspectors: True

What was omitted from the narrative is more important:
The WMD program was wound down: True
The stockpiles were destroyed: True
Inspectors were allowed back in: True

[Blue_In_AK]

9. Congress was lied to. n/t

[cali]

13. let me reiterate: there was a shitload of evidence contradicting the lies.

[geek tragedy]

11. The crazy left wants everyone to their right in prison or in front

of a firing squad.

[cali]

14. I don't. I just think it's an interesting question.

[Vincardog]

17. I think someone is confusing the right and the left

[geek tragedy]

21. Yeah, Stalin and Mao never happened. nt

[Vincardog]

16. What if the war crimes in question were TORTURE?

[Vattel]

18. Highlights of the AUMF for Iraq

Highlights of the resolution authorizing military force in Iraq:

"Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated; . . .

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq . . . "

[ThomWV]

20. They based their votes on lies they were told by the Administration - the only 'reliable' source

Remember, they were briefed to the minimum required by law, and then the information they were given wasn't true - Weapons of Mass Destruction indeed. So how else could they have voted, given that the White House was the only official source of information and they did not have any credible reason not to believe the President and his Vice President, or their Secretary of Defense. Granted, those were despicable sources, but at that time they they had not proven themselves to be criminally incompetent or worse, that would come later.

[El Supremo]

22. No just accessories.

They should have stopped it.

[Hannah Bell]

23. yes.

[Zax2me]

24. Add Obama to the war criminal list too

He increased our role in Afghanistan.
So, if you are calling little bush a war criminal, to be consistent.....

All this talk started as a result of Bin Ladens death. People were quick to say hey, we are just as bad.
Um, no, we don't set out each and every day to kill as many innocent civilians as we can.
Don't think that was/is Obamas goal in Afghanistan or little Bushies wars either, for that matter.

[Arctic Dave]

25. Devils advocate, OBL deeds were quite targeted but highly effective.

I don't think he gave two thoughts of the low level car bomber.

As for bush, anytime you lie to start a war it is pretty much a default the person cares nothing about life.

Not to mention the US dropped a shitload of ordanace on non military targets.

[ProSense]

29. "Devils advocate" Does that mean you're speaking on OBL's behalf? n/t

[Arctic Dave]

31. No, just pointing out what he did.

[RagAss]

26. They didn't fool Ted Kennedy.

[readmoreoften]

27. Yes. Obama too.