THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Has this been posted about what Hussein told an FBI agent:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/27/saddam.cbs/index.html

Important elements of the story:

"CBS: Hussein claimed he didn't think the U.S. would invade Iraq over WMD.
FBI agent says Hussein lied about having WMD to intimidate Iran,
But the Iraqi dictator said he wanted to start the WMD program again, agent said."

So the sheriff walks into the convenience store, the robber trying to hold up the place has his hand under his shirt and say he has a gun and will use it, and the sheriff shoots the robber, it turns out the robber had no gun, so its the sheriff's fault for shooting him, and the sheriff made the whole story up. That's what the Bush haters want to believe.

When I say "I'm going to kill you," it doesn't mean anything - legally or otherwise.

Has this been posted about what Hussein told an FBI agent:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/27/saddam.cbs/index.html

Important elements of the story:

"CBS: Hussein claimed he didn't think the U.S. would invade Iraq over WMD.
FBI agent says Hussein lied about having WMD to intimidate Iran,
But the Iraqi dictator said he wanted to start the WMD program again, agent said."

So the sheriff walks into the convenience store, the robber trying to hold up the place has his hand under his shirt and say he has a gun and will use it, and the sheriff shoots the robber, it turns out the robber had no gun, so its the sheriff's fault for shooting him, and the sheriff made the whole story up. Thats what the Bush haters want to believe.

Hate to come to Saddam's defense. But, a country that is surrounded by enemies, created and imagined, must lead with bluster. To go to a preemptive war on another countries soil backed by lies is criminal. This was double preemptive, the most that could be said of Saddam is that he was talking about doing something, ie, saber rattling. If someone has amassed a huge army on your border ~ that is preemptive and maybe justified. What Bush did is criminal and he should go to jail for it. This is the reason he would not recognize the World Court. He knows he is a criminal, along with Cheney and Rumpsfeel. That makes it preemptive and therefore, conviction would mete out the death penalty. His father was guilty of treason along with Reagan ~ what a family!

At least Jr isn't guilty of a penis crime. His father, yes. Sr had his stuff on the payroll, same as JFK. But, Jr does look:

They did not "Vote" for the war as righties like to twist the truth. They voted for due diligence in prosecuting a war based upon fact, not lies. Lies are unconsiousable and criminal ~ off with his head. After this year, Bush would never ever take a foreign trip cause he would be arrested, and probably reditioned....... What a great picture, Bush being waterboarded! I vote for rounding up his admirers and waterboard them too.

They did not "Vote" for the war as righties like to twist the truth. They voted for due diligence in prosecuting a war based upon fact, not lies. Lies are unconsiousable and criminal ~ off with his head. After this year, Bush would never ever take a foreign trip cause he would be arrested, and probably reditioned....... What a great picture, Bush being waterboarded! I vote for rounding up his admirers and waterboard them too.

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.

Quote:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.

And by not complying, that basically ended the ceasefire, so our invasion of Iraq could be seen as an extension of the first gulf war.

They werent given an "either/or" choice when it came to complying with the cease fire, it was "all or nothing".

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.

And by not complying, that basically ended the ceasefire, so our invasion of Iraq could be seen as an extension of the first gulf war.

They werent given an "either/or" choice when it came to complying with the cease fire, it was "all or nothing".

If by 'could be' you mean 'could be argued to be,' then maybe there's a valid point. In fact, however, it's sort of ridiculous to argue that this is the truth, as it most certainly is not.

Plz remember that it was not any specific action of Saddam's that caused this war, but an affirmative choice by Bush and his supporters in Congress.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.

And by not complying, that basically ended the ceasefire, so our invasion of Iraq could be seen as an extension of the first gulf war.

They werent given an "either/or" choice when it came to complying with the cease fire, it was "all or nothing".

If by 'could be' you mean 'could be argued to be,' then maybe there's a valid point. In fact, however, it's sort of ridiculous to argue that this is the truth, as it most certainly is not.

Plz remember that it was not any specific action of Saddam's that caused this war, but an affirmative choice by Bush and his supporters in Congress.

Cycloptichorn

Except that it was the invasion of Kuwait that started the first gulf war.
So, if it "could be argued to be" an extension of the first gulf war, then the invasion of Kuwait, AND the noncompliance with the ceasefire terms, are the cause of the invasion of Iraq.

Congressional Intelligence Report 09/08/2006
Postwar information indicates that the Intelligence Community accurately assessed that al-Qa'ida affiliate group Ansar al-Islam operated in Kurdish-controlled northeastern Iraq.

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002 (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq[/u];

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens[/u];

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable';

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and,

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region:

Now therefore be it, Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. 50 USC 1541 note.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/terroristattack/joint-resolution_9-14.html

107th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. J. RES. 23


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it


Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Passed the Senate September 14, 2001.

Attest:

Secretary.


107th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. J. RES. 23

JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense 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-defense 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.