Daivy, So why single out Bush for investigation? Don't think that Gitmo Bay is the only place torture has been used by the US or it's allies. Bush's mistake was that he got caught out and had to admit what they were up to. If you throw the book at Bush you'd have to throw it at a very long list of offenders. I know that that doesn't exonerate him or anyone connected with Gitmo or make right any act of torture.

After all the s-it that both sides have inflicted on eachother, picking out GW for punishment as the main culprit, to me, is pointless. If you go after Bush can you name the others you will also go after for similar offences?

And GW was not elected undemocratically as someone mentioned earlier. While SCOTUS did play a major role it was all within the bounds of the US Constitution. Like it or lump it, that claim won't fly.

Ditch
'but do we need it to understand what happened and ask if we want a re-run some time in the future? Has Bush served to point out changes that need to be made?' Still no attempt to answer the questions.
Claims about what was withing the US Constitution are pointless. George Bush was not President of the world. The US constitution only has effect inside the US, and if GWB had stayed home he would have not been a problem for the world.
Again I am asking if George Bush has served to point out changes that need to be made? What happened back whenever is probably too late to change, But this is now and if changes need to be made they can be changed now.
If you think that the actions of GWB where justified then say so. If not then say so. But this making excuses for the man's actions is just the justifier form of falacious arguement. Do your excuses indicate that you approve of GWB's actions?

Daivy, You should read my post more carefully. My reference to the US Constitution was directed to the claim made by a previous poster that Bush was not elected democratically.

I don't think there is anything in Bush's presidency that teaches us anything that we didn't already know. Power tends to corrupt and that is nothing new under the sun. What do you suggest that needs to be done to prevent more abuse of power by........those in power?

I'm not offering excuses BTW. I'm offering explanations. I certainly don't excuse Bush of anything. He was acting from a political perspective that differs significantly from mine. In a democracy the one who gets the top job is the one who wins the election. There's no overseer to determine if each candidate's agendas are acceptable or not, just the voters themselves

Dear Daviy,

You may be interested in the following website:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/radio/2008/11/19/horton/index2.html

Its an interview with Scott Horton on war crimes
prosecutions by Glenn Greenwald.

It deal with George W. Bush, and there are some
interesting questions raised.

Thanks Foxy
I agree with everything that is said. I quote;
'that although it's the case that in the past that presidents have broken specific laws, what has happened under the Bush administration is different in kind, not just degree, because what they've really done is assaulted the law itself.'
Ditch, I request that you also read this article. It gives a powerful explanation on why Bush is a different case to even Nixon. After reading this article I am hopeful that America will have a full enquiry into the Bush administration, and I am content with that for now. After that will depend on the results of the enquiry.

Yes I read that Daivy. Horton spoke of the mechanics of why Bush transgressed but hasn't addressed any of the reasons the reasons why Bush wouldn't be charged. He's suggested that the public needs to be bought on side and made aware of the seriousness of the "crimes". Hell, aren't they aware of that already.

Let him put his money where his mouth is and go ahead with his case. It's one matter to talk about it but another to take the cause to the courts. I wish him luck.