[saywhat?]

Originally Posted by Dave_01

You're Japan example is great...oh, except that when Japan attacked America they didn't do it to set us free from an evil tyrant...

My point was that it was an unprovoked attack. Yes Saddam was evil and committed incredibly horrible acts. That is not justification for a preemptive strike on a soveriegn nation. The president's multiple justifications for invading Iraq have not panned out. A preemptive strike like the United States made is illegal according to international law that we helped write. If Saddam were to face an international war crimes tribunal, President Bush could be accountable for the same crimes. That is why this administration would like to see Saddam tried by his own people not for war crimes internationally.

[JerryLove]

If Saddam were to face an international war crimes tribunal, President Bush could be accountable for the same crimes. That is why this administration would like to see Saddam tried by his own people not for war crimes internationally.

Which is why we like holdinh tribunals, but refused to sign a warcrimes treaty. Why we use the UN as validation for invading others, then turn around and complain at the thought that we should justify our own actions to them

[saywhat?]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Which is why we like holdinh tribunals, but refused to sign a warcrimes treaty. Why we use the UN as validation for invading others, then turn around and complain at the thought that we should justify our own actions to them

Blameless we remain. But a textbook example of how the top stay at the top!