Talk:Crime against peace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Crime against peace article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Yes, I have a question that could perhaps be addressed in this article. With regards to the responsibility for committing war crimes. In the example in the last paragraph: "Benjamin Ferenccz, a chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg said George W. Bush should be tried for war crimes along with Saddam Hussein for starting "aggressive" wars". Would those tried be only of the executive branches of governments or perhaps too of the legislative or law and authorizing branches? In the case of the US, its congress. Could they too be considered war criminals committing the crime against peace? 67.53.78.55Shootie2HUNT 29/10/06

The President sought and recieved Congressional authority to invade Iraq, so Congress authorized this war and Congress has the primary responsibility.

The war was undertaken under Article 51 authority. The requirement of notification was met, and all Security Council directions since have been complied with, so there are no violations of international law to discuss.

[edit] Blatant POV pushing

Why is this being used to push anti-Bush propaganda? Jtrainor 18:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tamils

What's up with the lone "See also" link at the bottom? Why that one, and why is that the only one?