International War Crimes Tribunal

“While listening to Pres Bush last night speak about the impending war, he mentioned that if Saddam's troops obey orders regarding *performing certain actions* (generally speaking) that they will be held responsible and accountable. Well, the thought crossed my mind that because most of the world is against this event, and we are going ahead regardless of not being supported by the United Nations, can Pres Bush be charged on counts by the International War Crimes Tribunal?

Anybody?”

“I think that'd be Seriously pushing it.

I wonder what the differences are (jurisdictional, etc.) between the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague and the International Criminal Court we opted out of.

Which court is a defendant remanded to and under what conditions?

(sorry, no help... only more questions)”

“I don't believe so. The US and others have resolutions dating back a ways that give them the legal grounds to act in this manner. It would be one thing if they never had the resolutions and just invaded or attacked, like say Japan did. The thought of a second resolution was just to give cover to some leaders politicaly in there respective home countries. 1441 is the only one that matters at this point.”