U.S. war crimes ambassador: Assad ‘absolutely’ should be tried for war crimes

[Sand Wind]

Source: Yahoo News

Syrian President Bashar Assad should “absolutely” be tried for crimes against humanity and war crimes, the top U.S. official in charge of such issues told Yahoo News. And the United States has, in a way, already started to build a case against him by training Syrians to collect information and analyze incidents on the ground in the country’s bloody civil war — evidence to use against Assad if that day comes.

“Enormous crimes have been committed that can be traced directly to the highest levels of the Syrian regime,” Stephen Rapp, the U.S. ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues, said in an exclusive interview Wednesday.

“Without question, there are credible, very credible allegations of crimes against humanity, murder, rape, mutilation, other crimes,” Rapp said. “And, of course, since we now have a civil war these become war crimes as well.”

Not only should Assad “absolutely” face trial, Rapp said, the quantity and quality of the evidence against him means his prosecutor “would have one of the better cases that we’ve seen at the international level against a chief of state.”

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/u-s--war-crimes-ambassador--assad-‘absolutely’-should-be-tried-for-war-crimes---231439748.html

---

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Xipe Totec]

1. Is he more, less, or just as deserving as Dubya, Chenney, and Rumsfeld? nt

[Sand Wind]

2. The more the U.S. will be involved in international justice, the more they

Will have to comply with it in the long term.

[Xipe Totec]

6. From your lips, to the All Mighty... nt

[Ash_F]

8. They should probably comply first. /nt

[stevenleser]

34. They who? The Syrian people who will ultimately have the trial? nt

[Ash_F]

39. Uhhh...what?

Here let me help you out there.

http://www.rif.org/

[stevenleser]

40. Follow your own advice and actually read the article. nt

[Ash_F]

41. What are you on about?

Your last post had nothing to do with this subthread.

[stevenleser]

42. You would know if you read the article. nt

[pangaia]

4. Just my thought..

Hey, Mr. Stephen Rapp- WTF about our own American war criminals? I think you overlooked a few, dude.
Rice, Wolfie, Kissinger aaaarrrrggghhh-- just typing that name makes me grind my teeth...

[Shemp Howard]

19. We certainly don't have the high moral ground here.

If you count casualties, Assad is not even in the same league as Bush II, Cheney, and Rumsfeld.

If you instead count disruptions to the peace and stability of the world, again Assad is not even in the same league as Bush II, Cheney, and Rumsfeld.

I'm not saying that Assad is a good guy. He's not. But so far, his crimes pale in comparison to Bush's.

Dennis Kucinich was right. As a minimum, Bush II should have been impeached.

[Posteritatis]

3. Dodging the "all war crimes threads need to be made about Bush" meme. Assad definitely should. (nt)

[ronnie624]

21. US citizens need frequent reminders of their own government's crimes.

Pointing out the stunning hypocrisy that is usually on display in these types of discussions, is ever relevant.

[Posteritatis]

22. Sure they do, and they get them. Should everyone else's crimes be actively dismissed? No. (nt)

[ronnie624]

23. Let someone with cleaner hands pass judgment.

Better yet, let the Syrian people determine their own destiny, instead of outsiders with an obviously self-serving agenda.

[ButterflyBlood]

24. How does Rapp have dirty hands?

He wasn't appointed by Bush and has no connection to the Bush admin.

I agree with the point here, while people should be reminded it shouldn't be the ONLY thing focused on, basically every single immediate reply to this thread aside from the one starting this sub-thread is a variation of "Why don't they arrest Bush first?" This also pops up in pretty much every single thread mentioning war crimes on DU, I even remember it with the announcements of the arrests of Karadazic and Mladic in Serbia (whose crimes predate Bush's) and STILL a majority of the replies was whining that Bush wasn't arrested too. It's possible to be upset about that without losing focus and basically saying every other war criminal out there is left off the hook. Does ever arrest of a serial killer today result in screaming about how the Zodiac Killer was never brought in? If there had been some attempt to apprehend and try Khmer Rouge leaders in the 80s (unfortunately this never occurred until far later in the mid-90s) would it be worth it to scream about how this isn't right because there were still prominent Nazis at large?

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Very coherent. You're on the mark.

But it would still be better if these (fully justified) comments came from a source that doesn't represent a government that ignores the beam in its own eye.

[Nihil]

32. He has dirty hands because he is the *US* war crimes ambassador.

The reason why the different variations on "Why don't they arrest Bush first?" keep
arising is that no-one - seriously NO-ONE - in the US Administration is paying
any attention to getting US war criminals into the justice system but deliberately
and actively seek the advice of said US war criminals to generate the propaganda
necessary to kick off yet another illegal & immoral war (e.g., Kerry seeking advice
from Kissinger).

*That* is why the subject keeps rearing its head.

*That* is why people all around the world laugh with derision at the thought of
any American official accusing ANYONE from another country of being a "war criminal"
who needs to be "brought to justice".

We are sick of the "Look, shiny object over there - let's bomb it!" response from
successive US governments and the hypocrites who (willingly or unwittingly) keep
the propaganda going against "the other" whilst glossing over their own criminals
of far greater scale.

[stevenleser]

36. Assuming that's true, how does that affect a trial that would be held in Syria, conducted by Syrians

?

[Nihil]

44. Having seen your recent string of non sequitur one-liners above ...

... this will probably be my only reply as I honestly do not believe you want any answers.

Point 1: My post was answering someone who didn't like the thought of the US "War Crimes Ambassador"
being described as "not having clean enough hands". It was not saying a thing about the location or
makeup of any trial so, yet again, you have posted a non-sequitur to divert the actual conversation.

Point 2: The OP article states that they are training Syrians to "collect evidence", not to hold
a trial themselves. Every reference includes an "international" qualifier, not a "Syrian" one.

e.g.,

> but the quantity and quality of the evidence against him means his prosecutor
> “would have one of the better cases that we’ve seen at the international level against a chief of state.”

> a blend of national and international staff with the support of regional powers.

> Our preference is to work with Syrians, with people in the region, with international players

> the type of accountability that they will face in the long run from the international community

So, for the second time, your posts are transparent disruption & attempted diversion.

Hope you are having a nice day on your planet.

[stevenleser]

45. Article says they are training Syrians to conduct their own trial in the region.

My comments are not the non-sequitur. The non-sequiturs are all of the comments that took the opportunity to attack the US without bothering to read what was really happening.

[stevenleser]

35. The Syrian people are the ones who would conduct the trial, in Syria. nt

[msongs]

5. the US government has no moral authority to charge anyone else with war crimes nt

[CanonRay]

7. You beat me to it!

[stevenleser]

33. The US wouldn't be doing so. He would be tried in the region. nt

[warrant46]

9. Thanks for the snuff pictures

Maybe we should post some of Draft Dodger Bush's handiwork

Nah

[SamKnause]

10. War crimes

Too many criminals disguised as leaders of countries, not enough trials and convictions.

[Politicalboi]

11. Why didn't we teach the Iraqis to do the same thing

How can we have the nerve to prosecute anyone else till we've prosecuted Bush/Cheney. What a fucking joke.

[stevenleser]

37. We wouldnt be doing the prosecuting. nt

[dkf]

12. I wonder if the Iraqis ever placed their victims of shock and awe side by side by side.

[ConcernedCanuk]

16. nope - couldn't put all the body parts together . . .

.
.
.

(sigh)

CC

[Jackpine Radical]

27. You just gave me a flashback to a particular scene in Vietnam, 1967.

But yeah.

[ConcernedCanuk]

29. Sorry about that . . . really

.
.
.

I lived in San Diego 1979 - 80.

My first room-mates were 2 young vets from Vietnam, both a little "off", but ok.

Being an inquisitive person, I asked them about their experiences in Vietnam.

One immediately got in his car and left; the other told me a few things, very quietly.

Then he stared at me unblinkingly and told me "Don't ever again ask either one of us what went on over there".

From the horrific stories he told me, I completely understood.

Was certainly not something they were proud of.

I never mentioned the "V" word again.

ever.

CC

[indepat]

13. Ambassador Rapp reminds me of major league baseball getting its knickers all in a

twist over some minor infraction of decorum after having seemingly forgotten it practiced overt discrimination until almost two years after the Tuskegee Airmen, among other African-Americans, returned from WWII.

[novapress]

14. al asad

asad is killer

[Cryptoad]

15. obama haters say there is no proof

need a pic of him firing the missiles and mixing the Sarin!

[RC]

28. Glad you brought up Obama.

Drone strikes against civilians in countries we are not at war with, complete with double taps.

[Hubert Flottz]

17. So should every war criminal.

Even if they are high ranking republican despots.

[on point]

18. How about Bush and the rest of his criminal pals ( Cheney, Rice Rumsfeld etc)

[L0oniX]

20. He can get in line behind Bush, Cheney, ect.

[magical thyme]

25. absolutely, if the evidence is there then prosecute him. right after Bush, Cheney, Wolfie

and the rest of the PNAC Gang of Thugs.

[Bradical79]

30. Defenitely.

Russia is who really needs convincing though. If the U.N. can lead the charge, then by all means go for it.

[Sunlei]

31. I agree. We need an International Tribunal asap.

[stevenleser]

38. People would do well to read the article. The trial would be conducted in Syria by Syrians. nt

[dipsydoodle]

43. As should Kissenger

.