The biggest reason why President Bush will not be prosecuted for torture

[KingCharlemagne]

78. Your unclear pronoun references ("that") in this case are

simply kllling me. (Please see our discussion yesterday for a similar nudge

The U.N. Convention obligates the U.S. to investigate and, if warranted, charge and try its own torturers inside the U.S. judicial system. The U.N. Convention contains no exclusion based on where the torture occurred; if there are credible allegations that we tortured, the Convention requires us to investigate and, if warranted, prosecute the charges. That applies, whether the torture occurred in Ferguson, MO, in Poland or in Timbuktu. (U.S. codes 2340 and 2340A specifically extend CAT to territory outside the U.S. proper, torture within the U.S. proper already having been a violation of existing Federal statute.)

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/101750.pdf

Bottom line: if the U.S. blows off its obligations under the CAT, then why should any nation henceforth feel obliged to honor any treaty obligation that so much as inconveniences it? We can return to full-on gunboat diplomacy where the U.S. Navy still has a commanding lead. (I hear tell, though, that the Chinese and Russian navies are making giant strides to catch up.)