Who is "MORE" Guilty?, W. Bush or the Troops Options

[Guest_CANNONBALL_*]

just a theoretical debate on guilt...

So you have a couple incidents where troops are being held in confinment for war atrocities.

And you have W...who sent the country to war based on shotty intel (if you wish to believe that). I don't...I think he's been gunning for Saddam since his daddy was in office and suspected him of having a smoking gun to justify his invasion, but whatever.

Who is more guilty? Bush may not have pulled a trigger, but he did something far worse IMO...he is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people....both foreign and our own.

Whether or not the troops did what the media has convicted them of is not for me to say. what the situation was, motivation was...etc is all speculative to date, because really, unless you're there...how can you tell what they did was wrong (or perceived to be wrong)? the fog of war is a bitch.

[Dogmeat]

I think that regardless of the justification for the war, which I honestly think still remains a matter of opinion as I don't think there's any real way anyone can "truly" know if it was worth it or not until about 50 years from now..... That if what the media is reporting is true, then the marines knew damned good and well what they were doing and had done was wrong and immoral.

I cannot comment on battlefield stress, etc as I've never even come close to experiencing anything like that in my life, and I also take things I read from national news outlets with a grain of salt...

But let's for instance say that there is a military tribunal for the marines and that tribunal determines they knowingly killed innocent people, then yeah, I think they otta have the book thrown at them.