Philosophical questions about the reasons for the Iraq War

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-07-22 05:49am

Just a question: If the USA used Saddam's human rights violations as justification for the war against Iraq, would that be a legal reason to wage war??

Post by **Edi** » 2003-07-22 06:11am

It would not have been a legally justified basis, but it was a morally justified one. Too bad they took that angle only when it was blatantly obvious they were only grasping at straws to get public support. It was on the human rights grounds mostly that the Kosovo campaign was sold (whether or not they were exaggerated), and that went through with great public support, though it was not legally justified either.

Edi

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-07-22 10:49am

Agreed. The fact that Iraq's massive human rights violations was a last resort for Shrub's attempts to sell the war is very telling of just how much he cares about Iraq's people, and the key point behind my original post.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-07-22 11:27am

Durandal wrote:Agreed. The fact that Iraq's massive human rights violations was a last resort for Shrub's attempts to sell the war is very telling of just how much he cares about Iraq's people, and the key point behind my original post.

To me, it always seemed more like he used the Iraqi human rights violations just as much as the WMDs as a justification for the war.

Edi wrote: It was on the human rights grounds mostly that the Kosovo campaign was sold (whether or not they were exaggerated), and that went through with great public support, though it was not legally justified either.

Now, if it was "legal" to declare war against a country, simply because of human rights violations and Bush used those violations as primary reason for the war, would it have resulted in less opposition to the war?