|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 11/02/2006 : 03:39:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1305709,00.html
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
quote:
http://www.lawyersagainstthewar.org/legalarticles/hinchey.html
Under international law, Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the UN Charter is clear:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”.
Article 51 spells out the right of nations to wage war:
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security”.
Since Iraq has neither waged an act of war against the USA or UK and since international peace and security is put at risk not by Iraq but by the USA and United Kingdom, the provisions for self-defence are not met.
Again, the Constitution makes treaties the law of the land, so this is not only a violation of international law, but is at least a violation of Bush's oath to support the Constitution if not a violation of domestic law. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2006 : 06:14:41 [Permalink]
|
Article 2 of the UN charter is a weak argument for the Iraq war being illegal.
There are, after all, several UN resolutions which require Iraq to comply with WMD inspections and disarm, all of which were ignored.
quote:
Again, I have not said that war is illegal. I asked you a question. What is your position on this? Is there no international law? You must have a position on this. Where does it come from?
I've given you my position on this issue a dozen times. Apparently you didn't bother to read any of those posts. You were to busy trying to call the troops fighting this war criminals.
But here it is again anyway:
IMO I would say that the US invasion of Iraq rests on questionable legal ground. The obviously wrong data that was used to claim Iraq was an imminent threat to the US, and the eagerness with wich the Bush admin pushed it, probably makes this war unjust.
I'm certainly not in favor of it.
But we part ways when you demonstrate your inability to comprehend the difference between the soldiers doing the fighting and the civilian leaders who sent them to fight, or when you start in on claiming that all wars are illegal because of "international law", or when you are so certain that this particular war is illegal.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2006 : 06:26:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But we part ways when you demonstrate your inability to comprehend the difference between the soldiers doing the fighting and the civilian leaders who sent them to fight, or when you start in on claiming that all wars are illegal because of "international law", or when you are so certain that this particular war is illegal.
Please show me where I made any such claims or where I have said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders. People keep telling me that I say that all wars are illegal. Show me where I said that. War, by itself, does not violate international law, and I've explained that to you before. .
I'm not particularly concerned whether or not the war is illegal, by the way. The rules by which it is illegal, and of course it certainly is, are the rules created by the same elites who ignore them when it's convenient.
As far as Iraq complying with the resolutions, we can argue that all day, but right before the war we saw what happened when Iraq complied completely with resolutions. We saw again that the U.S. used the U.N. when it was convenient, and ignored the U.N. when it wasn't. The U.S. wanted to destroy any hope of Arabs running their own lives. That is all. Probably unjust? Wow. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2006 : 09:26:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Please show me where I made any such claims or where I have said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders.
You do it all the time.
We have argued for pages and pages about your erroneous opinion that the soldiers fighting this war are criminals.
quote:
Probably unjust? Wow.
Yes, probably. I'm sure you are familiar with the portion of the constitution that grants the presumption of innocence to all people, until they are proven guilty of some crime.
Don't you think those responsible for this war deserve due process?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2006 : 09:35:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
[quote]Please show me where I made any such claims or where I have said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders.
I'll say it again. Show me, please. Show me where I said that all wars are illegal, and show me where I said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders. If I "do it all the time," it shouldn't be difficult to show me. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2006 : 09:45:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Don't you think those responsible for this war deserve due process?
So, now you're telling me that because I wish for a fair process for all, that I don't want a fair process for all? The point is not that I am forming a lynch mob. The point is that I am saying that they are violating their own laws. The U.N. and NATO and all the kangaroo courts that try people like Milosevic and Saddam Hussein are not about "due process." They're about legitimizing the criminal behavior of the mighty. Let's get some "due process." |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 06:27:48 [Permalink]
|
It seems as though GeeMack and I are largely in agreement:
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5072#75042
I don't think either one of us called soldiers 'criminals.' I asked a question which appears to be a sacred cow. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 06:28:50 [Permalink]
|
| I'll say it again. Show me, please. Show me where I said that all wars are illegal, and show me where I said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders. If I "do it all the time," it shouldn't be difficult to show me. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 09:58:22 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: quote:
But we part ways when you demonstrate your inability to comprehend the difference between the soldiers doing the fighting and the civilian leaders who sent them to fight
I used to take a position of total agreement with you on this issue, but now I no longer know what to think. I started to re-think the whole thing while listening to folk singer and social critic Utah Phillips talk about "supporting the troops". Phillips was in the army and deserted during the Korean war because of what he saw happening and no longer wanting to be part of it. He argues that when we excuse individual troops from responsibility, we essentially treat them like cogs in a machine rather than human beings with choices, minds, and their own consciences. I care about them, I want them brought home from Iraq, and I do respect their bravery and committment, so in that sense I "support" the troops. But I do not support their decisions to be part of this war, and I acknolwedge that they do have choices. And for what it's worth, I respect the troop who is Iraq because they believe they should be there more than the one who believes the war is wrong and does what he or she is ordered to anyway, or the one who doesn't even bother to think about the morality of their actions. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 10:12:21 [Permalink]
|
| I don't condemn any of them, certainly, but I think those of us who care about a better world need to start supporting those people like Lt. Watada who can no longer participate in what they know is a crime against humanity, rather than simply keeping quiet because we must "support our troops." People are so afraid of getting "the troops" angry at us, but they're not afraid to let them continue to be thought of as Martha says, mindless cogs and cannon fodder for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 10:37:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But I do not support their decisions to be part of this war, and I acknolwedge that they do have choices.
Not much of a choice for a lot of them. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 18:44:53 [Permalink]
|
Marf said:
quote:
I used to take a position of total agreement with you on this issue, but now I no longer know what to think. I started to re-think the whole thing while listening to folk singer and social critic Utah Phillips talk about "supporting the troops". Phillips was in the army and deserted during the Korean war because of what he saw happening and no longer wanting to be part of it. He argues that when we excuse individual troops from responsibility, we essentially treat them like cogs in a machine rather than human beings with choices, minds, and their own consciences. I care about them, I want them brought home from Iraq, and I do respect their bravery and committment, so in that sense I "support" the troops. But I do not support their decisions to be part of this war, and I acknolwedge that they do have choices. And for what it's worth, I respect the troop who is Iraq because they believe they should be there more than the one who believes the war is wrong and does what he or she is ordered to anyway, or the one who doesn't even bother to think about the morality of their actions.
1. Troops have a responsibility to abide by the laws of war.
2. Troops do not have the right to decide where and when they will or will not fight. They sign that right away when they enlist. You can be executed for failing to follow legal orders. Missing a movement of your unit during combat can get you long jail time.
3. There is no such thing, in my experience, as a troop who doesn't think about the morality of their actions. Do some of them destabilize after to long in combat? Yes. They lose sound judgement.
Personally I have no respect for a deserter. Every troop has the responsibility to refuse illegal orders and to obey the laws of war. Desertion is an act of cowardice unless it is accompanied by turning yourself in to an authority and having a damn good reason for deserting. Something like your unit doing somehting illegal and you bailed out to report it.
Nations, and their civilian leaders, bear the reponsibility for the wars they start or become involved in. Not the troops who fight in those wars.
Troops are accountable only for their specific actions while in combat, because they have given up many of their other rights to serve in the military.
We treat them like cogs in the machine because that is exactly what they are. But we also surely can, and do, hold them accountable for their actions on an individual level.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 20:39:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Marf said:
quote:
I used to take a position of total agreement with you on this issue, but now I no longer know what to think. I started to re-think the whole thing while listening to folk singer and social critic Utah Phillips talk about "supporting the troops". Phillips was in the army and deserted during the Korean war because of what he saw happening and no longer wanting to be part of it. He argues that when we excuse individual troops from responsibility, we essentially treat them like cogs in a machine rather than human beings with choices, minds, and their own consciences. I care about them, I want them brought home from Iraq, and I do respect their bravery and committment, so in that sense I "support" the troops. But I do not support their decisions to be part of this war, and I acknolwedge that they do have choices. And for what it's worth, I respect the troop who is Iraq because they believe they should be there more than the one who believes the war is wrong and does what he or she is ordered to anyway, or the one who doesn't even bother to think about the morality of their actions.
1. Troops have a responsibility to abide by the laws of war.
2. Troops do not have the right to decide where and when they will or will not fight. They sign that right away when they enlist. You can be executed for failing to follow legal orders. Missing a movement of your unit during combat can get you long jail time.
3. There is no such thing, in my experience, as a troop who doesn't think about the morality of their actions. Do some of them destabilize after to long in combat? Yes. They lose sound judgement.
Personally I have no respect for a deserter. Every troop has the responsibility to refuse illegal orders and to obey the laws of war. Desertion is an act of cowardice unless it is accompanied by turning yourself in to an authority and having a damn good reason for deserting. Something like your unit doing somehting illegal and you bailed out to report it.
Nations, and their civilian leaders, bear the reponsibility for the wars they start or become involved in. Not the troops who fight in those wars.
Troops are accountable only for their specific actions while in combat, because they have given up many of their other rights to serve in the military.
We treat them like cogs in the machine because that is exactly what they are. But we also surely can, and do, hold them accountable for their actions on an individual level.
Wow! You are spot-on, Dude. Nicely put.
As a former soldier and VFW, I agree wholeheartedly with your statement.
|
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2006 : 21:19:31 [Permalink]
|
First off - International law. Who is anyone kidding. The UN is moot. They refuse to take action when action is needd. They are hollow. I still hold them in contempt. The War in Iraq should not even be taking place. This is something that should have been handled during either the Persian Gulf War, or during one of the many violations of the cease-fire agreement.
Second - US law. The war in Iraq is illegal. Everyone calls it a war, including all branches of the government. The House alone declares war. The president, and all members of the House have broken the Constitution in this. They should have nailed them for Vietnam, and they should nail them for this.
How did any of the arguements ever stray from this? How did noone sue in the Supreme Court over the right of the House to give the President the power to declare a war? The House does not have the right to make those laws. How did we let the machine get us so involved in any of the issues of the war, and lose focus on this issue?
Peace
Joe
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2006 : 02:37:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
I'll say it again. Show me, please. Show me where I said that all wars are illegal, and show me where I said there is no difference between soldiers and civilian leaders. If I "do it all the time," it shouldn't be difficult to show me.
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
