TrailerParkJawa wrote:I also feel pretty strongly that if we invade another country with the intent of reshaping it to our liking there needs to be a formal declaration of war.
Damn straight. In 1941, America declared war on Japan in a state of rage because of the incredible, outrageous act of bombing US military targets without a formal declaration of war. A half-century later, this incredible outrage is still trotted out as justification for the nuclear terror-bombing of two cities and the wanton extermination of hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Since then, America has bombed how many countries without a formal declaration of war? Korea? Vietnam? Serbia? Afghanistan? Sudan? Iraq? The hypocrisy is so thick, you can cut it with a knife.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Darth Wong wrote: ...A half-century later, this incredible outrage is still trotted out as justification for the nuclear terror-bombing of two cities and the wanton extermination of hundreds of thousands of civilians.
I've not heard that explanation a lot. The usual one I come across is that it's justified due to the large number of Allied servicemen who would've had to give their lives to conquer Japan. Also that the Japanese army had been encouraging it's own civilians to comit suicide rather than surrender on some of the Islands that the US had already invaded, and if that pattern continued a lot of civilians were going to die whatever.
"Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, "Yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down, down, down. Amen!" If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it."
- Dan Barker
I agree. Also, in all fairness the US has very rarely attacked a country with which it had decent relations (as Japan did pre-WW2). Certainly I feel that the lack of formal war declarations is poor practice, but the situation isn't exactly identical.
I enjoy the U.S. cowboy approach to Iraq expressed by some folks on this board. Go in, shoot em' up, and then...well, here's where the plan falls to pieces. Then what?!? Once Saddam is thrown from power who will be placed on the throne? Will the U.S. be willing to send troops and supplies to protect this new regime or will they wish to commit troops for another ten years or so so that the region can stabalize itself? I wonder if these armchair generals realize the price tag of this little mission.
Next of Kin wrote:I enjoy the U.S. cowboy approach to Iraq expressed by some folks on this board. Go in, shoot em' up, and then...well, here's where the plan falls to pieces. Then what?!? Once Saddam is thrown from power who will be placed on the throne? Will the U.S. be willing to send troops and supplies to protect this new regime or will they wish to commit troops for another ten years or so so that the region can stabalize itself? I wonder if these armchair generals realize the price tag of this little mission.
I think you'll find that the plan is to remove Saddam from power, what happens next is probably of little importance to the US. If Saddam is responsible for supporting the 9/11 attack, then what have the US got to lose? How could any replacement be worse than Saddam?
"Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, "Yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down, down, down. Amen!" If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it."
- Dan Barker
The following letter by Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has been
sent to all members of the UN Security Council, with copies to the UN
General Assembly and Senator Biden of the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations. Please circulate.
July 29, 2002
Dear Ambassador, Any remaining hope the peoples of the United Nations have
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war through the United
Nations would be crushed by another United States attack on Iraq. Threats
to attack, invade and overthrow the government of Iraq by President George
Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, various cabinet
officers and Pent
agon officials have been routine for a year. The
psychological warfare is itself a crime against peace and violates the U.N.
Charter. Today's front-page headline story in the New York Times, "U.S.
Exploring Baghdad Strike As Iraq Option," is typical of the in terrorem
intention of the threats. The danger to civilian life in Baghdad from such
a strike would be enormous.
The United Nations Must Act To Prevent An Attack By The United States
Against Iraq If the United Nations is unable to restrain the United States,
a permanent member of the Security Council, from committing crimes against
peace and humanity as well as war crimes against a nation that has already
been violated by the U.S. beyond endurance, then what is the United Nations
worth? At the very least, opposition to any attack or attempt to overthrow
the government of Iraq by force must be publicly expressed by the United
Nations.
The United States Bombed Defenseless Iraq Mercilessly For Forty-Two Days
In
1991 The U.S. led and glorified the massive assault on Iraq in January and
February 1991. The Pentagon announced it conducted 110,000 aerial sorties
against the defenseless "cradle of civilization," dropping 88,500 tons of
bombs. The widespread bombing destroyed the economic viability of the
civilian society throughout the nation. It killed tens of thousands of
Iraqi citizens and others. A major part of the bombing was directed at
civilians and civilian facilities. It was less accurate than the recent
indiscriminate attacks in Afghanistan. U.S. bombs destroyed Iraqi water
systems, electric power transmission, communications, transportation,
manufacturing, commerce, agriculture, poultry and livestock, food storage
facilities, markets, fertilizer and insecticide production, business
centers, archeological and historical treasures, apartment houses,
residential areas, schools, hospitals, mosques, churches and synagogues.
The Pentagon stated its casualtie
s were 156. One third were from "friendly
fire"; the rest were accidental. The U.S. had no combat casualties.
The United States Forced The Imposition Of Genocidal Sanctions On Iraq In
1990 The U.S. crafted economic sanctions against Iraq which the Security
Council approved on August 6, 1990, the 45th anniversary of the U.S. atomic
bomb attack on Hiroshima. Those sanctions are the direct cause of the very
cruel deaths of more than a million people. This is the greatest crime
against humanity, in the last decade of the most violent century in
history. Each painful death of an individual wasting away-from
malnutrition; Kwashiorkor; the rush of dehydration from contaminated water
and from diseases-was preventable. The sanctions continue to this time to
cause hundreds of deaths each day. Every United Nations agency dealing
with food, health and children-including FAO, WFP, WHO, UNICEF-has
proclaimed the horror, magnitude and responsibility for this human
catast
rophe. The great majority of the deaths caused by the sanctions are
infants, children, the elderly, the chronically ill and emergency medical
cases. These are the people most vulnerable to polluted water,
malnutrition, and the lack of medicines and medical equipment and supplies.
U.S. claims that it is the Iraqi government that is responsible for deaths
from shortages of food and medicine are false. The U.S. blocked oil sales
by Iraq for six years before appearing to yield to humanitarian pleas to
permit oil sales to purchase food and medicine. Since 1997, when sales
began, it has effectively frustrated and delayed the Oil for Food program,
which does not provide sufficient income at the levels approved to stop the
daily deterioration of health and growing death rates in Iraq. Before
sanctions there was virtually no malnutrition in Iraq and free hospital,
health services and medicines were a model for the region. Its present
system of government distribution
of available food staples is a model of
fairness and efficiency, lacking only in quantity and variety of food.
United States Military Aircraft Have Attacked Iraq At Will For Eleven Years
The U.S. has engaged in air strikes against Iraq at will since March 1991,
when the massive attacks averaging one aerial sortie every 30 seconds
ended. Without losing a single plane, U.S. attacks have killed: cleaning
personnel at the Al Rashid Hotel in Baghdad in a failed attempt to
assassinate Saddam Hussein; scores of people each year in attacks on radar
stations in or near the U.S.-imposed no-fly zones; all the persons aboard a
U.N. helicopter shot down by U.S. aircraft; and civilians from all walks of
life, including the internationally famous artist and Director of Iraqis'
National Center for Arts, Leila al Attar.
Iraq Is Not A Threat To The U.S., Countries In The Region Or Others The
U.S. has falsely claimed that Iraq is working to develop weapons of mass
destruction to a
ttack the U.S., Israel, its neighbors and others. The U.S.
claimed its 1991 attacks destroyed 80% of Iraq's military capacity. The
U.N. inspection efforts claimed to discover and dismantle 90% of Iraq's
post-1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction. Iraq, its
peoples and resources are exhausted. It has a "stunted" generation of
children under age 10 and a debilitated population at all ages. It is the
victim of the worst crime against humanity in recent decades.
The United States Is The Greatest Purveyor Of Violence On Earth Two of the
highest U.N. officials responsible for U.N. weapons inspection within Iraq
and a principle U.S. citizen participating in the inspections have
resigned, denounced the sanctions and denied that there is a threat that
Iraq will develop weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. has more nuclear
weapons than all other nations combined as well as the most sophisticated
and numerous systems for the delivery of nuclear weapons,
including the
Trident II submarine fleet. It possesses the greatest stockpiles of
chemical and biological weapons and the most advanced and extensive
research in mass destruction weaponry in the world. Military spending by
the U.S. exceeds that of the nine next largest budgets for war
combined. President Bush has repeatedly declared the right to strike
first. The U.S. attacked Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic bombs and
continues to justify those acts. The U.S. has renounced treaties
controlling nuclear weapons and their proliferation; voted against the
protocol enabling enforcement of the Biological Weapons Conventions; and
rejected the treaty banning land mines, the International Criminal Court
and virtually every other international effort to control and limit
war. The U.S. War Against Terrorism is a declaration of right by the U.S.
to attack first-anyone, anywhere, on mere suspicion, or without excuse,
unilaterally. The U.S. wants to overthrow the gov
ernment of Iraq and many
others in violation of law. Unless restrained the chance for peace and
global equality of economic, social, cultural and political opportunity
among nations will be lost. Which government presents the greater threat
to peace globally or for Mesopotania and its neighbors-the U.S. or Iraq?
An Attack By The United States On Iraq To Overthrow Its Government Would Be
A Flagrant Violation Of The U.N. Charter, The Nuremberg Charter And
International Law If, as promised so many times, the U.S. does attack Iraq
to overthrow its government, it will be the most notorious, arrogant and
contemptuous violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the Nuremberg
Charter and international law yet experienced, or likely hereafter. Only
absolute power unrestrained by any rule of law or standard of human decency
openly taunts an intended victim as President Bush has taunted Iraq.
Because the U.S. has committed historic injustices against Iraq, most
duri
ng his father's presidency, and still seeks dominion in the region,
President Bush, his Vice President and others in his administration hate
Iraq and want finally to destroy it. I am writing this letter to you; to
each U.N. Representative of a Security Council Member; the President of the
General Assembly; and President Bush. This is one of a series of letters
describing and protesting U.S. and UN wrongs against Iraq. The threatened
wrong addressed here is the worst. If twelve years after its devastating
aerial assault and after twelve years of genocidal sanctions, the
omnipresent risk and frequent fact of random attack with the ever present
stalking by U.S. aircraft and endless threats against its helpless victim,
the U.S. commits its coup d' grace on the people of Iraq to the silence of
the U.N. and wealthy nations of the world, human shame and impotence will
doom us to ever greater violence.
A U.S. Assault On Iraq Will Cause More And Greater Violence; Urgent
Action
By The United Nations To Prevent A U.S. Assault Of Iraq Is Required I urge
you to immediately activate the United Nations, the General Assembly, the
Security Council and all its agencies to denounce the continuing threats by
the United States against Iraq, to demand immediate cessation of the
threats and to warn the United States that an attack by it on Iraq will
violate the Charter of the United Nations, international law and the
friendship of all who seek peace and respect the dignity of humanity.
An Attack By The U.S. On Iraq Would Violate The Constitution And Laws Of
The United States Requiring Impeachment, Trial Before The U.S. Senate And
Criminal Charges In Federal Courts Against President Bush And All Officials
Responsible An attack on Iraq by the United States would also violate the
Constitution and laws of the United States and expose President Bush to
impeachment by the House of Representatives under the Constitution of the
United States for th
e highest of crimes, those against peace and humanity,
to judgment by the United States Senate and trial in federal court for
crimes charged. Unfortunately in recent years our Constitution has been
more honored in the breach than in faithful observance of the rights it is
intended to protect for all. But the effort to hold accountable any U.S.
authority who participates in an assault against Iraq will be made here by
those who love their country and for that reason insist that its acts be just.
Sincerely,
Ramsey Clark
BTW Does anyone know why my text formatting gets screwed during the text cut&paste?
I think you'll find that the plan is to remove Saddam from power, what happens next is probably of little importance to the US. If Saddam is responsible for supporting the 9/11 attack, then what have the US got to lose? How could any replacement be worse than Saddam?
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
USAF Ace wrote:I have very little to say in responce to that letter. This is it:
snipty snip
It is Iraq that will be a smoking hole in the ground. This time the U.S. will have done it.
This is all true. But one thing is quite disturbing about all this, and thats what is America doing to other nations who do similar sorts of things? I remember a cartoon from the time when Bosnia was in the news.
"Vast oil reserves have been found in Bosnia and Serbia, said to be bigger than the Saudi feilds. The United States administration has declared the Serbian government a clear and present danger to the United States and a full mechanised corp of the US army will deploy immediatly to Bosnia. President Clinton has said that the inhuman treatment of minorites must cease, Slobadon Milocovic {sp?} is worse than Hitler. Advanced elements of the 82nd Airborne are deploying as we speak, with Hillary Clinton leading the charge...wait..hang on..the report of Oil reserves is false..and yes..The 82 airborne is withdrawing and the army corp is standing down..."
Damn straight. In 1941, America declared war on Japan in a state of rage because of the incredible, outrageous act of bombing US military targets without a formal declaration of war. A half-century later, this incredible outrage is still trotted out as justification for the nuclear terror-bombing of two cities and the wanton extermination of hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Mr Wong,I disagree.The only other option available would have been the invasion of Japan,the operation "Downfall".I think you should give a look to the plans and then maybe you will change idea.I can assure you that in comparison Stalingrad would have looked like a picnic...
