That question has troubled me for quite a while. The Hamdan decision certainly suggests that, by ignoring the Geneva Conventions even in Guantanamo (let alone in Iraq), a war crime has been committed. And in the military, the command structure insists that superiors are held accountable. I’ve been saying this for a long time now, and have watched aghast as the Bush administration has essentially dumped responsibility for war-crimes on the grunts at Abu Ghraib. The evidence already available proves that the president himself ordered torture and abuse and the violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Honestly, I think he is a war criminal at this point, I do think he should be removed from office and charged by a court. The problem is, what court, and who is possibly going to try and charge him? Oh right, it won’t ever happen. It’s a nice idea though…
Wandering the Interwebs 