Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan
I bold faced it for you - if Chomsky and you think W is a greater criminal than OBL that is an opinion, not an "uncontroversial" fact
As far as the UN being the decider as to what governs the conduct of sovereign nations, the Hamdan majority and dissenting opinions provide a pretty good analysis of that issue with regard to what the U.S. does and does not buy into when it signs an international agreement
It's not just an opinion. It's a completely uncontroversial assessment of reality. George Bush launched two thoroughly illegal wars (wars of aggression, the war crime numero uno) against the wishes of the majority back home in what is supposedly a democracy, and in complete contravention of international law. The most conservative bodycount numbers produced by those two wars are in the hundreds of thousands, while others put it in the millions.
Bin Laden, on the other hand, was involved in the USS Cole
attack, and was probably involved in 9/11 as well (although now we will never know for sure.) Even assuming that bi Laden's status within al Qaeda is the equivalent of Bush's Commander-in-Chief position, thereby putting all responsibility for the attacks squarely on his shoulders, the numbers still lean heavily against Bush.
All of these people all monsters. We don't need to quibble about that. The comment from Chomsky was that Bush's crimes far exceeded bin Laden's, which is 100% true. And yet it would still be unacceptable for al Qaeda to launch a commando attack in the US to grab Bush, kill him in his home, and then dump his body in the ocean. Nothing Chomsky said qualifies as the ravings of a fanatic... unless
one simply never, ever
questions the right of the United States government to do whatever it wants to whomever it wants wherever they want to do it, and especially when it is clearly flatly illegal.
I'm at a bit of a loss to draw the connection between Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld
and assassinations overseas. The UN and the World Court adjudicate international law. International laws and treaties which the US has signed automatically become the law of the land. What's the complication here?