I DO REMEMBER TRHAT gERMANY LEADERS AFTER WW2 WHERE PUT ON TRIAL ALSO BECAUSE THE "PREHEMPTIVE STRIKE AGAINST OTHER COUNTRIES. What ever maybe the reasons a country cannot be attacked without any hard reason. Just immagine for one moment that mr. Bush may be judged by other countries as tyrant for its imposition of "Patriot act" etc. etc.... and because ot this those countries resolve to attack USA to get read of Bush. This action can be judged criminal? Per eps somebodies may object that it may be debetable. But so was debatable the decision to invade Irak. I remember many countries were against, but Bush went alone with only help of UK. so, was he wrong? Whatever may be the sophism to score a point to demonstrate that Bush was wright. the logic of the equation make Him criminal and with Him all His allies. Yes Sadam was a dictator but that was not enough to justify the invasion and the killimg of 30000 Irakis (Bush stated it) and was no exuse or justification to use napalm on civilian in Fallujia.
Iraq prepares troops for offensive to retake Mosul (Reuters)
from the article: Two wrongs don't make a right