Iraq invasion in 2003 was illegitimate: Dutch probe

JTT needs to come back to this thread. He thought we were blowing off the entire issue.

No, I think you all misunderstand my position. I would not appeal for us to invade Burma, the Sudan or Iraq for that matter because of atrocities perpetrated within those countries by their own government. I supported going into Iraq for one reason and one reason only. And it had nothing to do with how Saddam treated his people. The point of my post, and not a very well expressed point based on responses, is that y'all are really quick to cry for all these people who died during a war with Iraq (and rightly so, since death should never be something we celebrate) and try to claim that American soldiers were mass murderers but y'all seem strangely silent about atrocities and true instances of mass murder elsewhere that American soldiers have no presence. I guess it is only when our military is involved that some of you find large numbers of dead people appalling.

No, you desire to persist in claiming that members of the Bush government are war criminals for killing masses of innocent Iraqis. The problem you face is that you cannot claim that American leaders are mass murderers without claiming that our soldiers were complacent in the mass murders. Now, if you believe that our soldiers were mass murderers with the approval of our government, then just come out and say it. But you cannot have it both ways. Either our government and our soldiers are guilty of mass murder or neither one is guilty. But I think this reasoning will go over your heads as you continue to make the claim that our military is doing a bang up job while it is only our former governmental leaders that are the mass murderers. Ah well.

Anyway, I hope I've explained my position a bit better. While Saddam needed to be removed for what he did to his own people, I would rather have seen his people do the removing as opposed to us. While the world should have been morally outraged, just as much as we should be outraged over the Sudan, it is not our business to go in and straighten them out. Y'all have a good day.

Let's put to rest this ludicrous argument that it's okay to blow off the war crimes/mass murders caused and committed by your own by pointing to others who do/have done the same.

That is not what I just did. Please try to read a little slower and comprehend a bit better than what I think you have done. Or, again, maybe I failed to make myself understood. That could very well be the case also.

edit: After re-reading the line you pulled out, I can see why you would think I was doing what you wrote. It was not my intention to justify any REAL war crime by saying it happens elsewhere. If you take the post in its entirety, I think you will see that.

That's a goddamned lie, i've never said anything of the kind, and i resent the accusation, which you can't support.



The mass murderers to whom you refer here are not perpetrating their crimes in the name of my nation, at the expense of my nation and at the risk of the lives of the men and women in the armed services of my nation.

As it happens, this is also a disgusting straw man, because i have frequently decired instances of mass murder in more than one thread at this site. In particular, i have mentioned the continuing threat of the Serbs to the stability of the Balkans, and the response i have gotten is Gunga Dim roaring off into another of his witless rants against Clinton, and members here from Eastern Europe implying that i am racist to blame the Serbs for what happened. I found it truly ironic when the Serb nationalists made significant gains in the last parliamentary elections in Serbia, but my critics were strangely silent on that topic.

When people have brought up the plight of the Darfur region of the Sudan, i have pointed out that the Sudan is a failed state, which has been locked in a stalemated civil war for more than 20 years. The response of the author of one of the threads was to ask me what the hell that had to do with Darfur, as though it's OK if Muslims and Christians kill each other in the Sudan, but it becomes an international crisis when Muslim militias start killing black African animists.

I once pointed out that about the only thing the Afghans approved of with regard to the Taliban was when they put the drug lords out of business--and the guy in that thread who had decided to argue with everything i wrote then claimed i had said we were Afghanistan as a part of "the War on Drugs," which was patent bullshit. Then he started ranting about NATO troops being responsible for the deaths of so many Afghans. So i asked him if he thought it made any difference to a family to see their mother killed by a stray NATO bomb, or to see her executed in the soccer stadium in Kabul by the Taliban because she was caught wearing make-up in the street. I got no answer to that one.



This is another goddamned lie, and i'm starting to get sick of you making accusations against me that you can't substantiate. I have never referred to Bush or any member of his administration as a war criminal. So keep that bullshit to yourself. If you want to rant at somebody about that, find someone who actually says that, and pick a fight with them.

I'm done with your bullshit, go f*ck yourself, liar.

No, it is especially when our military is involved that I find large numbers of dead people appalling.

Wildly gesticulating, fingers pointed at those potential other war criminals, stroking his ego, all the while ignoring that which is much closer to home.

Put off his campaign to right the world's wrongs by Gungasnake, jesus, how lame is that?

Never crossed my mind for a second, Wandeljw. By the by, have you got your phone book yet? Was it delivered to your home or did you have to pick it up yourself?

Your post, taken in its entirety, is a shining example of a person trying to deflect the discussion away from the evil done to the people of Iraq [and many many others] by your government.

I'm not sure who these people are that you're referring to -- there probably are a few scattered individuals who fit your description, maybe even here on A2K (although I think the real goofballs left the site when it changed format). On the whole, though, you're making a strawman argument. I think most people who opposed the war are appalled at the deaths of thousands of Iraqis at the hands of American troops because they were unnecessary casualties in an unnecessary and illegal war, not because those deaths were somehow comparable to the crimes of Saddam Hussein. Likewise, GWBush and Tony Blair aren't war criminals because lots of Iraqis died in the war, they're war criminals because they're responsible for launching a war of aggression in contravention of international law and treaties. We hanged folks for that at Nuremberg.

Set, as someone once told me, if the shoe fits, etc. I did not explicitly accuse you of anything. If you believe I did, then please point out what I claimed you said and feel free to refute it.

You cannot claim that many of those who opposed Bush with a hatred that seems a bit excessive have not accused him of war crimes and yearn for the day when he and his cronies are brought to justice. I was simply pointing out that people who insist on that way of thinking have no choice but to accuse our military of being willing participants in the mass murders and thus cupable also. I am quite open to hearing arguments to the contrary.

I'm sorry you have taken direct offense at what I wrote. But as usual, you manage to resort to name calling and language that is inappropriate. Nothing new there. So you can be done with me for all I care. That doesn't really bother me in the least.

There you go again, CR. It's like tapping you on that sweet spot below the kneecap.

Joe, I don't claim to be an expert in international law. I am but a common citizen and base my opinions on what I perceive to be right or wrong. I trust that those we vote into power will follow international law. (Silly, I know.) I know that our congress gave the president the power to use military force in Iraq, even though many of them later said they didn't think he would use it without coming back to them first. But, if we intend to point fingers, let us point them at all involved. If Bush is a war criminal, then so too is every member of congress who authorized him to go to into Iraq. That is inescapable.

Well, it's especially silly that you trust that, as your favored political party - at every opportunity - states that they have no intention of following or even respecting international law whatsoever.



This is only true if you assume that all had equal access to the same intelligence. We know for a fact that this was not the case, and that the Bush crew presented selective intelligence to Congress and actively lied to them many times about what the CIA and other groups knew.

Cycloptichorn

I know JTT. The American government is evil. We Americans are the devil incarnate whose only purpose is to do evil wherever we can and to as many people as we can. I often wish and believe we should just pull our military out from everywhere in the world and stop sending monetary support anywhere in the world and let other countries handle their own problems. I really do think this would be best. But alas, I fear I have lost the support of Setanta and thus will never get into a position where I could make this come about.

You're right: you don't know much about international law. Bush was the man who ordered the troops into Iraq. That was his decision (remember, he was "the Decider"), and he cannot spread that responsibility to anybody else. Just because congress played the part of Bush's willing stooge doesn't change that fact.

I will grant you that one Cy. It is of course only true if all had access to the same intelligence. But then again, I think if I were a democrat member of congress, I would at the least want my leaders to speak to those supplying the intel before committing to a course of action that would lead to war. But, as I like to say, I can't say for sure since I've never been in that position. So I can easily see them taking the intel at face value.

And again, you're doing it, CR.

Stop the brain jerk reactions; think about what has been said. You don't have to turn this into a sackcloth and ashes whine. That's just another attempt at deflecting the discussion from the real issues, the important issues.

It's only those portions that are evil, it's only those portions that are war crimes that have to be dealt with. Don't you think that honesty demands that?

Let's not forget John Howard and the rest of the leaders from the Coalition who wanted to suck up.

Yep, you're right Joe. No argument here. The buck stops with the president. It was his decision and in the long run he is responsible. But the person who stands lookout at a bank robbery is just as culpable for the actions of the guys inside.

I think, when it comes to Iraq, that our leadership failed on many levels. In hindsight I think most sane people will agree we could have avoided using military action. But that does not necessarily make our government leaders guilty of any war crime. Again, I'm not overly familiar with international law concerning this and as such will not get into arguments over the legality of the invasion. If some believe Bush to be a war criminal, so be it. Every leader from every country that sent troops should be viewed likewise. I just cannot wrap myself around the idea that Bush can be viewed as solely responsible.