I'm just waiting for the day the international criminal court hands down

indictments for this * cabal. I understand that bushco*, in a self served way, says that they have no authority but I feel they do and will exercise it. The big question for me is will our democracy last until that day? At this point it appears that our future as a democracy is slipping away. It will be much easier to salvage our democracy now than to wait until it's gone and then try to regain it.

I say all hands on deck for we have a peace to win.
Some tough decisions to make.

the ICC has no authority in the United States, what, you expect the Belgians to invade and take Bush by force? What happens outside the US is irrelevant, our democracy is our problem, not the rest of the world's, and if we can't fix it, they certainly can't.

compare Germany in 1933 to 2006 America. You can't compare Germany in 1945 to America in 2006.
To do so betrays ignorance of history.

If you look at all the countrys we have invaded outright and covertly I see a real comparison to nazi germany

without defending, and indeed while condemming, pre-emptive war, if you're comparing bush 2006 to Hitler 1945, the comparison is spurious. As for the Haliburiton camps, we are faced with real and concrete dangers in the present. Shouldn't we deal with those? Quite a bit would have to happen before the dangers of "Haliburton camps" became a reality. Bogeymen are scary in an obvious way, the erosion of civil rights and the concept of a unitary presidency are far more pressing.

us which I see more likely each day. You have to know they are getting worried about the way we have occupied Iraq and now have ours sights on Iran. I'm sure they have read PNAC and see the similarity's to what the * cabal are doing now.

how, exactly? over the north pole? across the Bering straight? through Canada? They would have to use first strike nukes to take out our nuclear arsenal, otherwise they couldn't invade, even if they wanted to.

so: the logistics make such an invasion impossible, neither China nor Russia has much of a power projection capability right now, you'd need 20 million soldiers to invade the US, minimum, that's a lot of logistics. and 2: we still posess several thousand nuclear weapons capable of turning China and Russia into post-apocalyptic playgrounds for radioactive mutants (at the price of ourselves, of course, but if we're going down anyway...)

China can't invade Taiwan, 30 miles away, how are they getting here, exactly?

Care to give a carefully thought out rationale, complete with supporting arguments, why you believe a joint Russia China attack on the US is likely? And no, saying that they're worried about the US attacking Iran is not a rational argument for such an invasion.

BTW, it's countries, not countrys and similarities, not similarity's.

one untouched by war or strife, with deep levels of economic, social and cultural capital to spend on an invasion of a smaller, less populated and exhausted country 4,000 miles away. Any modern parallels you can think of? Or is the People's Republic of China your saviour? good luck with that.

why do you still live here, if we are late-nazi?

What's more, I can't think of a single American politician who would support it. Not Al Gore, or Kennedy or Feingold or Sanders. I can almost guarantee that they'd strenuously object. Wishful thinking makes for lousy politics.

We'd be far better off concentrating on investigations leading to impeachment. Even that won't happen if we don't get a dem majority in the House.

in several other states I don't see that happening. Whos to investigate the criminals, the criminals themselves.

we'll just have to wait and see as far as the November elections are concerned. I predict the dems will make significant gains. You're sure it will be stolen. There's no way to settle this now, but it's far more likely that dems will take control of the Congress by huge numbers (and that's not likely at all) than that bushco will ever be prosecuted in the Hague.

things might be very different.

The fact based question question is will the victims who have the right to bring charges be in a position to bring charges before the aged Rumsfeld, the ailing Cheney, and the demented dictator die of other causes?

a grounding in reality. Reminds me of what my mother often said: If ifs and ands were pots and pans, and all the sea were ink, and all trees were bread and cheese, what would there be to drink?

Geopolitics can and do change. The world of European domination of the 1890's, which included a Spanish empire from Europe through the Americas and into the far east greatly changed by the 1950's.

The same could (and I think ultimately will) happen to US domination. Certainly the rise of China and India to the economic top is already in progress. Interest in the military significance to protect those gains cannot really be expected to lag terribly far behind; can it?

The event Rumsfeld expressly fears is the rise of an Islamic superpower either through a coalition or a unification of state. What might be possible in a world court if an Islamic power, India and China dominate the security council of a UN-like organization rather than the powers of last century?

I'm not saying it's going to happen. I'm just saying that people have long memories when it comes to grievances (Think of the Jews and their continuing pursuit of Nazi war criminals.) What seems impossible now can change.

Will it happen within the lives of Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush? That seems to require that the sweeping away of global American hegemony be near at hand. That does seem unlikely from today's perspective.

it would mean that we, as a society failed. If we can't take care of ourselves, then we don't deserve to even be a country.