Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (34877)	5/24/2005 5:07:27 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Umm, could it be because seven US Army personnel have already been charged and up to twenty others may face charges in that case, all as a result of a thorough internal investigation that produced the 2000 page report you find so widely quoted in the news? Ummm, do I need to point out that those cases were not and are not going to be tried as "war crimes"? Those US military persons are being court martialled. There is a slight difference between that and a war crimes tribunal. What makes you think any such trial would NOT take place, 'with US command "bringing the charges"'? The fact that Laz was talking about "war crimes" makes me think that if ever such charges are brought onto US military personnel, it will not be a US tribunal trying the case. Think La Hague, more likely, although my personal feeling is that such a war crimes tribunal will either never take place or will be in a distant future, a la Pinochet.