Iraq Conflict

[scottish2]

Well in my case I too want more proof but the thing that scares me somewhat is something I heard the other day. I have yet to research this but if so I would hate to see the black eye America would get in regards to this but supposedly based on the Nuremberg Charter which came about due to the trials after WW2 bombing cities to oblivion as some in America Supprt in regards to baghdad is considered a war crime. How will we look if this happens? I mean already Europe is growing in Anti-American sentiment how would it look if we do exactly what some want and especially doing it alone or with little support. I mean news coming out of he Azores says only 3 counties supported Bush in his move for war in pushing the UN to make a decision tomorrow at the latest. How is it that only 3 out of all the nations of the world support Bushs push for war?

[Catriona]

Scottish2
This is the reason that the rest of the world attributes to the US decision NOT to sign up for the World Court of Justice (not the correct term, but I'm too tired to think of what the real name IS!)....!!!!  

The American Govt did not want its troops, leaders laid open to being brought before the Court as war criminals!  I think it was a cynical move to make sure that such a thing would not happen in light of the US decision to declare war - illegally - and without a UN mandate.

The trouble is:  it was fed to the US people as 'our legal system is the best in the world, and we could be laying ourselves open to being judged by regimes which we consider criminal'.....

You are right to be concerned!  

Don't get me wrong - Tony Bliar is acting like Bush's poodle in this - a large portion of the British people feel that we are rushing pell-mell into a war which has dubious moral grounds.

GIVE ME THE PROOF - and I then withdraw my reservations to the invasion of Iraq.

[scottish2]

Well the weird part is part of Bush's argument is that Saddam and Iraq harbour terrorists well why wasn't Saddam also made a target right after 911 all Bush was after was Bin Laden I mean that's not saying Saddam wasn't always a worry but it took them this long to all of a sudden decide to take him on? He's not been hiding in caves and has been quite easy to find.

And my other concern is what happens with our military taking on 2 fronts (Iraq & least we forget also Afganastan) and at least one pretty much a lone save one or two other countries such as the UK should Blair not back down and then what happens if Iran wants to get involved as has somewhat been indicated and then of courses ther's still N. Korea and least we not forget China. I mean if we do this how far spread will our military become? Bush I don't think is thinking of the big picture. If we goto war we maybe starting something no one or two countries can stop and that's what scares me. How many countries like N.Korea might have WMD that we might not know of?

[Jimmy Carbomb]

Hussein was a target right after 911, but the Taliban and Al Qaeda were a MUCH greater threat at the time, with direct links to the tragedies.  Now that they are "in order" to an extent, the pipeline of money and munitions in Iraq is the target.

As for Iraq and North Korea, there is one HUGE difference between the two.  Hussein denies chemical/biological capabilities, and denies WMD's.  There is NO negotiating with that.  North Korea readily admits to what they have, and has already led the way into negotiations on surveillance and assistance.  Diplomacy in Iraq was given 12 years... and Hussein chose to ignore the ramifications.  Now he's seeing the results.  North Korea knows the consequences, and is willing to do this peacefully.

As for giving proof of the Iraqi capabilities and attrocities, everyone will get the specifics when the people are liberated and the stories of Hussein's dictatorial methods are given by HIS OWN COUNTRYMEN.  It's coming to light now, and (quite frankly) even makes my stomach queezy.  Considering that Stalin was his model, he's done rather well!

By the way, I greatly appreciate the even tone that all have displayed on this delicate subject!  It goes to show everyone's character and intellect.  It's also a wonderful way to be educated on the many sides to this situation.  Thanks all!

[scottish2]

Well a few of us did have to lead a protest midstream but we got it all worked out. LOL

Now bare this in mind I have yet to turn the news on but so far as all I can see all the US has found in their invasion is SCUD missiles and burning oil wells. And I have two concerns here. From what I have been seeing on-line is that the SCUBs are perfect legal under the agreement because they are mini SCUDs with a range of 150 KM or less. And from what I have been hearing these missiles do no exceed this range so bare this in mind that even though you hear it regularly on the news these may in fact be fully legal under the UN agreement.

I also have to realy wonder on these oil wells. Just prior to the invasion there were Spiratic reports by gulf war vets coming forth and saying it was they under direct orders who lit the fires. So I have to wonder once again who really lit the fires in this current invasion.

Also has Bush been honest with us?

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/world/article.jhtml?articleID=511811

Second  I would worry more about Korea then Iraq even before the invasion on Iraq begain. We know N. Korea has the bomb

Todays news http://www.cnn.com/2003....ex.html

Quote

N. Korea suspends talks with South Saturday, March 22, 2003 Posted: 1:03 AM EST (0603 GMT) SEOUL, South Korea -- North Korea has suspended next week's talks on economic and maritime cooperation with South Korea, blaming Seoul's heightened military alert status.

Problem as I said I fear is a multifront war where our forces are spread so thinly.

And while I know this will be an unpopular comment who is going to hold Bush accountable for his actions? I start out with these two articles as proof.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,909164,00.html

and

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=384604

At least Bush thinks this is a war in Afganastan. So by his own feelings these two men are hence Prisoners of War (POW's) and they have protections under the Geneva Convention with which the US agreed to the terms. Part of these terms state in part. (Also note this is the UN's website as can be seen at the base of the page. I know some may wonder based on the numbered address instead of text.

http://193.194.138.190/html/menu3/b/91.htm

Quote

PART II GENERAL PROTECTION OF PRISONERS OF WAR Article 13 Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest. Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity. Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited. PART III CAPTIVITY SECTION I BEGINNING OF CAPTIVITY Article 17 Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information. If he willfully infringes this rule, he may render himself liable to a restriction of the privileges accorded to his rank or status. Each Party to a conflict is required to furnish the persons under its jurisdiction who are liable to become prisoners of war, with an identity card showing the owner's surname, first names, rank, army, regimental, personal or serial number or equivalent information, and date of birth. The identity card may, furthermore, bear the signature or the fingerprints, or both, of the owner, and may bear, as well, any other information the Party to the conflict may wish to add concerning persons belonging to its armed forces. As far as possible the card shall measure 6.5 x 10 cm. and shall be issued in duplicate. The identity card shall be shown by the prisoner of war upon demand, but may in no case be taken away from him. No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind. Prisoners of war who, owing to their physical or mental condition, are unable to state their identity, shall be handed over to the medical service. The identity of such prisoners shall be established by all possible means, subject to the provisions of the preceding paragraph. The questioning of prisoners of war shall be carried out in a language which they understand.

With Bush being the top of the chain I have to ask who is going to hold him accountable.

Now excuse my next commments they are directed toward the Nazi's of WW2 not German or it's war time civilians.

But in WW2 we did not let the Nazi's get away with some of the same arguments Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rumsfell are using so why should they be any different then the Nazi's. The Nuremberg court denied the Nazi's claims of preemptive strikes yet Bush does the same thing. Who is going to hold him accountable.

This in no means means I support Saddam, but I do not support war and killing either. And if wanting peace is now a crime then I am proud to be called a criminal! There is a big difference between supporting the US and it's troops and supporting it's government. I support the first 2 but not the last.

[CelticRadio]

Regardless of your position on the war, I think we can all agree and hope for a quick end to this war with as few deaths as possible on both sides - atleast that is what my family is praying for.

I have the highest regard for the U.S. soldiers that are putting their lives on the line. No one expects when you sign-up for an all volunteer military that you are going to end up in a war; of course you know that it could happen. They are conducting themselves in the true spirit of America. A picture I saw on CNN said it all - that of a U.S. soldier cradling an Iraq soldier and letting him drink from his own water can. That says it all.

On the War front, I am truely in awe at the might of the U.S. military and the technology. I can certainly understand why there is so much concern in the world given the U.S. capabilities. I was just amazed Thursday nite watching live video from one of the armored personal carriers making its way to Baghdad.

So, in support of our troops we are now proudly displaying a brand new American flag on our front deck - but I do hope for a quick end to this war.

[aklassie]

Amen ! ! ! ! !

[scottish2]

I do support our troops 110% it's just IMHO the maniac in charge that worries me.

There are issues that after the dust settles wil have to be answered for. We would not let Germany get away with war crimes and the deaths of the 2 POWs being beaten to death by their captors have to be dealt with this violates the geneva conventions treatment of POW's. I mean you would not let a murder get away with a crime so why should the military get away with crimes that violate the law of man?

As I said I know my views don't always make me the most popular member of at least this forum but why should our government not be held to the same standards the very same government held Germany to in 1945 - 46 (Specifically the NAZI's So please don't take offense by me saying Germany I am specifically refering to those in the Nazi Ranks that were held accountable) WHat makes our government immune to being charged for their own war time crimes. When a good portion of the world both opposing our actions and also watching we cannot let the world see us as trying to do as we wish and not expecting reprocussions from our actions.

With our government being as powerful as it is we have to hold them to a higher standard because they know just how deadly our weapons and forces can be when put into full action and I would hate to see the world situation get worse because we failed to control our own public servants.

OK Off my soapbox.

[CelticRadio]

I went ahead and changed the topic of this thread to "Iraq Conflict" to better reflect some of the posts. Also, with it consuming up alot of the news I thought it might be a good place to post items about it.

[maggiemahone1]

Quote (aklassie @ Mar. 23 2003,7:21)

Amen ! ! ! ! !

And I'll second that!  Pray for our men and women who are risking their lives for us, so we may live in a safer America.  

maggiemahone1

[Warbringer]

I have family in Iraq, however that doesn't mean I am Iraqi, or that I support Saddam Hussein. But that doesn't mean I support Bush either.

I hate Bush more then I hate Saddam, partly because Saddam is not the agressor. I live in US btw, and I have to qutoe my dad on something really quickly:

"US is lowering the money to be spent on education so they can draw more of the youth to the military, which promises education."

US is becoming a militaristic country. Americans are kidding themselves if they think this war is not about profit, it IS. Sun Tzu's quote comes in handy now.

"Only those who are fully aquainted with the evils of war can find the most profitable way of carrying it on."

This country is becoming more fascist every month. First the military gets glorified, with Bush appearing on TV and proclaiming that the US Military is the best in the world and will meet any opponent with valor or whatnot.

Then comes the 2 Patriot Acts. The first one was bad enough, but it is the second which worries me. The "Bush Administration" is slowly but surely instilling more order but removing freedom.

I live in California, our gas prices are ihghest in the entire country. But...US does not import oil from Iraq, so why is it that Oil Prices are skyrocketing? They claim it is some new substances added in with the gas to pollute less, but I think that is B.S. It is an excuse to make money, because the ignorant masses will automatically think it is due to our war with Iraq.

The Bush Administration is taking advantage of the horrible events at 9-11 to make war. First Afghanistan, now Iraq. In my opinion, I believe it is either NK (unlikely) or Iran, which has MUCH more terrorist connections then Iraq and has a more powerful economy and military, and is not under any sanctions.

But of course, Bush has to finish what his dad started first...

[/endrant]

[RavenWing]

Blame the oil prices on the Oil Companies and OPEC, not the government.

BTW, a chemical weapons plant HAS Been found.  I believe it was in Jafra or something like that, 90 miles south of Baghdad.  

Also, A very good friend of mine was in the Special Republican Guard.  He has told me many times of the money runs he made to Osama Bin Laden as well as the many times he had to act as a bodyguard to Osama himself.  WHy should I disbelieve him?

[Aon_Daonna]

okay, this might be a bit late but:

The germans were the ones responsible for the atrocities of the nazi regime, I don't deny that. But we had the process AFTER the war.

I also agree that Saddam has to go. But when why war when he is not the agressor? I mean I thought alot about words in the last time and something like a "preventive war" is absolute nonsense. As well as the word collateral damage, but that's not the discussion.

Also I criticise: "shock and awe" how can I awe at somebody who is destroying things that are important for me? That name... ah well.
Those precision bombs need to get some correction in aiming.

I will never, NEVER agree with a preventive war. And I won't agree with a "coalition of the willing" because it takes us back into the world before the 1st WW. No nation is better than another and nobody stands above justice, This is arrogant. And the arrogance to set themselves above others is really setting me off.

But as shown in history, those governments who are arrogant will fall deeper.

Thank you for noting my oppinion

Aon

[Aon_Daonna]

btw: why destoying all weapons when you know that there will be war anyway?

[Jimmy Carbomb]

Scottish2... believe me... your views are much more popular than you will know.  Although I may not agree with them, atleast you have the courage and the education to voice them rationally, intelligently and sincerely.  Unlike the majority of the protestors that I see on the news, who are spouting Bob Dylan and Jane Fonda recycled speeches, you are voicing (or typing) your opinions in ways that are thought provoking and appreciated.  Keep going.

As far as Saddam not being an aggressor, we'll all hear about 30 years of his "peaceful" nature when the Iraqi people are free to speak without reprisals.  

Obviously, we can all agree that the troops need to come back swiftly, healthy, and with "clear consciences".