Wow … I’m not an American, but I have oft times admired your country as a source of hope and inspiration for the rest of the world. One need only look back at some of the roles America has played in transforming the world. For example, under the leadership of FDR, your countrymen helped free the entire European continent. With single-minded purpose and justice on your side, you fought off the warriors of Facism and terror and helped make the world a better place.

Now, only a couple of generations removed, one can only be disappointed in many of your reactions. How can a country as great and as enlightened as America, not support a candidate simply because of his or her religion. Morman, Muslim, Chatholic or Evangalical religious views are most assuredly not the way to pick a leader. As an outsider looking in, I beg you, please search for the best candidate based upon how you think they will perform, not on how they worship God. Not all Muslims believe that America is evil, just as not all christians think that Mecca should be destroyed.

You live in a country rich in history, backed by a glorious history and a deep commitment to bring the ideology of democracy to the rest of the world. Get back to your roots and vote based upon policy - not religion. The Bush Jr years are over, it’s time to start a new chapter and one can only pray that you choice and enlightened path based upon compassion and understanding.

Good luck America … the world is watching.

Bill Clinton is not a great world leader and Bush did not wage an illegal war against Iraq. The report that came out in Sept of 2004 showed that Saddam was in fact trying to keep his weapons program going, and he was bribing the French and Russian personnel to the UN — using the UN’s own Oil for Food Program — to get them to lift the sanctions against his country. As soon as the sanctions were lifted, he was going to get his program moving right along, and with chemical weapons you don’t need a lot of time to make up a sizable stockpile. The truth is out there. You just have to look past the liberal media and the endless recirculation of their misinformation and out-right lies.

EDV- I read you long drawn out retort and as usual it is filled fulled of endless useless jargon that does not address the topic at hand. Fact, the prisoners at Guantamo are not covered by the geneva conventions as they are not uniformed combatants that either wear uniforms, or carry identification of the nation they represent. Both are required to be treated as “Enemy combatants.” Hence when they are caught up engaging in terrorist activities they will not and should be afforded the same privileges that are awarded to followers of the geneva conventions. It is also stated in the conventions that the signatories of the convention will abide by the restrictions so long as the combatant that they are facing do as well.

Third Geneva Convention 1949, Article 2 states:
“In the relationship between the “High Contracting Parties” and a non-signatory, the party will remain bound until the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention.”

Furthermore in addressing what you would label “War of naked aggression,” Saddam did not honor is agreement to grant open access to UN weapons inspectors as stated in his surrender in the first gulf war. And sadly linguini spines like you and the UN are unwilling to enforce upon a real “War Criminal” like Saddam the treaties in which he entered into. Instead you would accuse George Bush of being a war criminal.

A “War of naked aggression” would more properly be catergorized as Saddam’s attacks on Iran, Kuwait, and the Kurds of Northern Iraq.

So in short, as a soldier who spent a year fighting in the streets of Iraq, I reject your classification of George Bush as a war criminal, and our current involvement in Iraq as a “War of naked aggression.”

To label George Bush as a war criminal is to also label the men and women of our armed forces war criminals as we would be just as guilty for refusing to obey an unlawful order.

EdV, Bill Clinton´s bombing and occupation of Serbia and Kosovo territory was ILLEGAL.

i’m not american, but i have one question.
bill clinton was a great world leader, not just in your country i believe. but what’s the big deal if Clinton had an affair so that you impeached him? don’t we behave in one way or the other in the same nature to satisfy our own demons?

So whats new. Bill Clinton is not famous for being truthful. This is just another in a long line of untruths.

To all of you who are foolish enough to waste your vote on Obama; who’d you rather have in the White House?, A Muslim, or an American? It’s not the color of the skin, it’s the great 9-1-1 that you should remember! Go ahead, and give in….we’re already losing our Country….we, Americans are becoming extinct.

I agree with Bill Clinton, the Country better wake up and take responsibility for who their trusting to make decisions in regard to this Country…..doesn’t anyone remember the great 9-1-1? Obama is a Muslim and we, Americans better wake up!

Bush has waged an illegal war, he attacked a soveirgn nation without a true basis for war and was admonished for this by the UN and he has contained thousands of people without a trial as terrorists and approved torture and abusive interogation techniques that are considered War Crime against the Geneva Conventions as well as the Nuremberg Principles.
A war of naked aggression, what Bush did to Iraq is a capital crime under US Codes, prohibited by the Nuremberg Principles.

Let me also point out the “Torture Memo” as example number one of War Crimes. This memo which put forth a plan that allowed the infliction of pain unless it caused such injuries as “organ failure . . . or even death.” (Any infliction of pain up to that point was deemed not un-American.)

Nuremburg Principle of note:

Principle Vl

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:

Crimes against peace:
Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

War crimes:

Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or illtreatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

Crimes against humanity:

Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
–Principles of Nuremberg

These were the charges that the chief US prosecutor, Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), brought against German Nazi leaders for judgment at Nuremberg. As Justice Jackson put it: “We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it.”

We must work to bring about the equivalent of an international Nuremberg trial for the Bush administration, the American perpetrators of crimes against humanity in Guantánamo, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the CIA’s secret prisons. There is no dearth of evidence. Much of it is available from documented international reports by human-rights organizations.

The objection raised to the exercise of jurisdiction by this Tribunal on behalf of the Defendant, by amicus curaie ; and the United States government claiming “impunity” in various forums , against indictment for war crimes ; is best answered by the undertaking given to the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg , by the Chief Counsel for the government of the United States of America , Mr. Justice Robert H. Jackson , who stepped down temporarily ,as Judge of the United States of America , to represent the United States before the Nuremberg Tribunal , established pursuant to the Moscow Declaration and the London Agreement of 1945 , to which the government of the United States was a signatory . Justice Jackson categorically declared that:

” If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes , they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others , which we would not be willing to have invoked against us …”

The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg referring to the charge of waging a war of aggression , highlighted the gravity of this offense in the following words:

” To initiate a war of aggression ….is not only an international crime ; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes, in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”.

He’s definately right on Obama….
http://obama-we-want-change.blogspot.com/