To suggest criminal responsibility for anyone other than the actual criminals
themselves (perpetrators) is ludicrous.
What would be criminally responsible would be for the US to kidnap one elected
leader of a country and forcibly depose him to further their own interests.
(criminal as in war crimes) :-)
I am sure you already know that the US Republican party has always subscribed to
the notion that "We know what is best for you" and in the current
administration, it has never been so obvious.
The cure for this is our Electoral system, which unfortunately will probably be
stolen this year as it was in the past. Mostly because of voter apathy.
Our country is doing exactly what we (as a nation) complained about as regards
to Red China and the former Soviet Union, as well as others. It is no wonder
that we are held in high esteem by only thugs and criminals around the world,
and held up to disdain by most of the others.
On another subject: while I support our Armed forces, and their dedication to
their duty, the administration is really dealing them a bad deal with how they
are being used for political purposes. Fighting an aggressive war is not what I
would consider an appropriate use of reserves. How many more must die before
the electorate wakes up and gets this criminal out of office?
-----
And that is precisely why one interpretation of aiding and abetting the
genocides by action/inaction with full knowledge of the consequences, is
considered Criminally Responsible.
Vetoing bills that would have increased the number and authority of UN
forces in Rwanda makes one criminally responsible when that action leads
to the death of 800,000 people. And when it was known that the veto
would lead to the death of several thousand people.
Criminal Responsibility.
-Gel
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
