Adios Rummy

You know America is in trouble when the right starts to ignore disaster with laughter… I think the American psyche is peculiarly attuned to not seeing either its own social reality, or that of world beyond its borders. That is likely because of the lingering sense of ‘manifest destiny’ to manage the world according to antideluvial standards – or in other words, according to mythic or fictional moral guidelines which are simply inapplicable to people outside of the American aquarium, linguistic habit, etc…

Think of HOW LONG it took for Americans to take to the streets during the Vietnam fiasco! It took a thousand boys dying a week, and the draft, to get the lethargic and silenced minds to wake up enough to say ‘NO!’ to an inhumane and insane war effort…

As the posts above show, the Republicans are not much good for anything but creating a big debt burden. Reagan did the same thing…

Only Clinton knew how to get his chicks for free… The guys in Zigga Zagga, mostly republicans, certainly don’t…

:slight_smile:

As said, my bet is he won’t be found guilty. Actually I’d even bet his case will be dismissed in Germany as “nicht zulässig / unzuständig”. And as said, I’d be fine with that for the reasons outlined above.

What I consider very interesting though - why was Germany picked to rise that balloon? Not only because another foreign country could have be picked as well … but why was the U.S. itself passed up when choosing where to sue?

[quote=“games”][quote]Nov. 14 — Emboldened by the resignation last week of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, lawyers today asked a German prosecutor to investigate Mr. Rumsfeld on allegations of war crimes, stemming from the treatment of prisoners held in military jails in Iraq and at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The 220-page lawsuit, filed with the German federal prosecutor in Karlsruhe, names 11 other current and former American officials, including Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, whom it alleges either ordered the torture of prisoners or drafted laws that legitimated its use.[/quote]

Sorry, but I deny any involvement with this prosecution/investigation and am neither too keen to see them carried out in and by Germany.

I mean … didn’t we do our due back in 2003? Told pretty clear that we did not deem the Iraq adventure all too well conceived. I don’t mean just the elected schmucks, there had also been the peace demonstrators whom one can explain only in part to have been mere “Anti-American Hippies”.

I’d seriously prefer this all to be handled by U.S. courts. Why does Germany now have to get involved in any clean up?

On the other hand I am pretty convinced not much will come around anyways, so I am probably just ranting here.:smiley:[/quote]

[url=http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/09/1444246]Would Rumsfeld stepping down leave him open to prosecution? In 2004, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a criminal complaint in Germany on behalf of several Iraqi citizens who alleged that a group of U.S. officials committed war crimes in Iraq. Rumsfeld was among the officials named in the complaint. The Iraqis claimed they were victims of electric shock, severe beatings, sleep and food deprivation and sexual abuse.

Germany’s laws on torture and war crimes permits the prosecution of suspected war criminals wherever they may be found. Now, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Michael Ratner, is returning to Germany to file a new complaint.

. . . …

Well, we went to Germany before. Germany dismissed the earlier case on Rumsfeld, partly for political reasons, obviously. Rumsfeld said, “I’m not going back to Germany as long as this case is pending in Germany.” He had to go to the Munich Security Conference. They dismissed the case two days before. What they said when they dismissed it, what they said was, we think the United States is still looking into going up the chain of command, essentially, and looking into what the conduct of our officials are.

In fact, now, two years later, look where we are. One, he has resigned, so any kind of immunity he might have as a vice president [sic] from prosecution is out the window. Secondly, of course, as, you know, a little gift package to these guys, you know, our congress with the President has now given immunity to US officials for war crimes. They basically said you can’t be prosecuted for war crimes. That’s in the Military Commission Act. Now, that immunity, like the immunities in Argentina and Chile during the Dirty Wars, does not apply overseas.

So, now you have Germany sitting there with – there’s no longer an argument the US can possibly prosecute him, because within the US, he’s out. So you have Germany sitting there with a former Secretary of Defense and basically in an immunity situation in the United States. So the chances in Germany have been raised tremendously, I think, and the stakes for Rumsfeld, not only in Germany, but anywhere that guy travels, he is going to be like the Henry Kissinger of the next period.

. . . . .

We’re re-filing it in German courts under their law, which is universal jurisdiction, which basically says a torturer is essentially an enemy of all humankind and can be brought to justice wherever they’re found. So we are going to Germany to try and get them to begin an investigation of Rumsfeld for really a left-out part of this picture, which is the United States has essentially been on the page of torture now for five years.
[/url]

My understanding is that Germany has a really good law for trying international war criminals wherever they may be in the world. The U.S. Congress passed a law, Military Commissions Act, which retroactively absolves any U.S. personnel of war crimes committed - i.e., the new torture/interrogation techniques perfected at Bagram in Afghanistan, and Gitmo, and then taken over to Abu Ghraib. I hope the Germans prosecute and CONVICT Rumsfeld and everyone else responsible for the crimes committed against innocent people. War criminals should have no sanctuary.

Bodo

Yah, ve got smart unt use der courts now

I give you that: German Law allows for a lot of things. Prosecute corruption, sack lazy officials …

Implementation though depends a lot on policital will. :wink:

Go ahead and google a bit “Kohl” “Ehrenwort” “Spendenaffaire”.

I am sceptical of Rummy ending up in chains.

Not to be a grammar-Nazi, but it is: “Jawohl! Ve got ze smart and use der Bundesgerichtshofsrichtervereinigungsabteilung - schnell Hans!”

[quote][url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/16/world/middleeast/16policy.html?th&emc=th]General Abizaid also publicly said for the first time that the American position in Iraq had been undermined by the Bush administration’s decision not to deploy a larger force to stabilize the country in 2003. That decision was made after Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, the Army chief of staff at the time, told Congress that several hundred thousand troops would be needed. His testimony was derided by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, and the general was ostracized at the Pentagon before his retirement a few months later.

“General Shinseki was right that a greater international force contribution, U.S. force contribution and Iraqi force contribution should have been available immediately after major combat operations,” General Abizaid said. “I think you can look back and say that more American troops would have been advisable in the early stages of May, June, July[/url].”[/quote]

This is a serious indictment of Rumsfeld’s leadership, IMO. The active duty commander in Iraq stating that Rumsfeld should have listened to Gen Shinseki’s advice.

Bodo

[quote=“Bodo”][quote][url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/16/world/middleeast/16policy.html?th&emc=th]General Abizaid also publicly said for the first time that the American position in Iraq had been undermined by the Bush administration’s decision not to deploy a larger force to stabilize the country in 2003. That decision was made after Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, the Army chief of staff at the time, told Congress that several hundred thousand troops would be needed. His testimony was derided by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, and the general was ostracized at the Pentagon before his retirement a few months later.

“General Shinseki was right that a greater international force contribution, U.S. force contribution and Iraqi force contribution should have been available immediately after major combat operations,” General Abizaid said. “I think you can look back and say that more American troops would have been advisable in the early stages of May, June, July[/url].”[/quote]

This is a serious indictment of Rumsfeld’s leadership, IMO. The active duty commander in Iraq stating that Rumsfeld should have listened to Gen Shinseki’s advice.

Bodo[/quote]

You got to be careful with this one - Shinseki is very bright, was right and as thanks got early retirement - but Abizaid & pals did not have the guts to stand up to Rummy when they knew better,

Rummy’s no dummy. He got a raw deal. One day the world will recognize him as the strategic genius he is, the Winston Churchill of our time who, just like Churchill, was sent off into ignominy by an ungrateful country after saving them from a fanatical enemy.

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

I see the beautiful weather on this fine Friday morning has got you in good spirits too.