Just another brainwashed misinformed american.

Like saying it wasn't even a real trial and it was set up by someone who was clearly biased and could have filled the tribunal with people that felt the same way as him? That it is about as relevant as if you made your own tribunal off of some truther site and held a mock trial?

Please provide evidence of this grand statement.

Bush has Immunity under International Law!

Its not just that war criminals have "immunity," it is that they are above the laws. Unless there is someone with more authority and more power to police the political criminals of the world, they will always go unpunished.

Its in your own article. Mock tribunal = fake trbunal

Mahathir, who stepped down in 2003 after 22 years in power, unveiled plans for the tribunal in 2007 just before he condemned Bush and Blair as “child killers” and “war criminals” at the launch of an annual anti-war conference.
Mahathir Mohamad — a fierce critic of the Iraq war

Obviously biased.

I take it then that you support the child killer and war criminal crowd?

i wouldn't support obama, and i never have... he is just as much as a child killer as bush...

If Obama had chosen to prosecute(if he realy had a choice) He would have earned his Nobel peace prize. He had the wind at his back and the people behind him. He played politics and not convictions.

Ill say it again dems and repugs are two cheeks on the same @ss.


I will vote for Obama anyhow because over all dems support my values far better than republicans.

I don't know of any war crimes and I am pretty sure he has never killed anybody much less a child.

actually Saddam was the Childkiller,and got his Neck stretched for it!
Maybe you remember the UN Oil-For-Food-Fiasco!

U.N. Oil-for-Saddam program also justifies the liberation

Remember how Saddam Hussein’s defenders used to blame U.N. sanctions for 10,000 deaths a month because Iraqi children were denied food and medicine?

Of course, the pseudo-liberals made that argument only when they knew the United States favored the sanctions. When the U.S. decided to remove Saddam altogether, the terrible sanctions suddenly were a good thing, part of a perfectly acceptable “containment.”

To the friends of fascism, it suddenly was worse to risk several thousand lives in a one-time U.S.-backed liberation than to continue killing 10,000 a month – or whatever the real number was – through hunger and disease.

Certainly the sanctions hurt the Iraqi people. The trade blockade was supposed to encourage Saddam to comply with U.N. resolutions requiring that he stop repressing the Iraqi people, return Kuwaiti prisoners of war, abandon support for terrorists, and cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors. But Saddam continued his repression and lawlessness.

Which is why the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program was established in 1995 under U.N. Resolution 986. The program let Saddam sell about $4 billion of Iraqi oil each year as long as Saddam promised, and the U.N. could guarantee, that the oil money was spent only on food and medicine for the Iraqi people.

Well, guess what? Not all that money went to food and medicine.

U.S. congressional investigators reported today (March 18) that Saddam violated the Oil-for-Food program so often, using smuggled oil, surcharges and kickbacks, that he illegally “skimmed” $10.1 billion for himself.

While his people were starving and babies were dying without medicine, Saddam spent much of the ill-gotten cash on his palaces, police and fascist platoons. Billions of dollars were stashed away for his family. Some money was set aside to bribe world leaders. And if you recall, he himself was not wanting for cash even when he was pulled from that spider hole three months ago.

If you need yet another justification for Saddam’s ouster, the proof is there in his violation of Resolution 986. He stole his nation’s wealth and allowed many thousands to die each year because of his greed.

http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/03/un_oilforsaddam.html

cutting your Nose to spite your face?

That would be if I voted republican. Since I was not born rich just middle class, the dems do more. The auto bailout is just one example.

Our allready strained industrial base would have been totaly destroyed had a republican been in the white house.

Republicans do not have a chance at all with Romney. I am glad he is the nomination, but realy he is just a sacraficial lamb.

Americans have not forgotten what 8 years of Bush did to the country. The biggest complaint about Obama is he hasnt done enough to erase what Bush did.


Its going to be a landslide.

So what you are saying is you like dems more because they give you more stuff at the expense of people more successful than you?

Yep,if more people like an Emperor!
Vive l'Empreur sans vetements!

still blaming bush? i guess you forget he had a DEMOCRATIC controlled congress and senate during his reign... and aren't you always pointing out how little power the president actually has? they cannot do much without congressional approval... so your anger is really pointless... obama is a loser, just like bush was, and has done nothing to take back (as you put it) what bush has done...didn't repeal the patriot act, like he said he would do, didn't close guantanamo, like he said he would, and is sending mindless drones into friendly nations killing people at will... and bush was bad?

yeah,Obama really is going to set a precedent that can come back and bite him in his Behind!

Well my friend your not far off the mark, I cant argue against it.

A republican will do all that as well but also cut funding to those most in need. Gut environmental regulations cut taxes for the rich and raise taxes on the poor. Increase military spending and cut spending on the infrastructure, etc etc.

Do I wish I had a better choice sure do.

However right now he is the best choice.

Except Bush lowered the tax rate in every bracket.

stop it man he lowered them for the rich far more than the middle class.......you know it and so do I.