See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Dutch panel finds Iraq war had no legal mandate
Source:
BBC
URL Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8453305.stm
Published: Jan 12, 2010
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2010-01-15 03:03:16 by Tatarewicz
Keywords: None
Views: 1679
Comments: 132
A Netherlands legal panel has concluded the West's military action against Iraq had no sound mandate in international law and that Dutch political support for the war was to a considerable extent led by public and other information from the US and UK. The inquiry, which included a former Supreme Court judge, found the war was not justified by a UN resolution. Tatarewicz: Would be interesting to know if the 550-page report identified the Israel agents in the US administration who were primarily responsible for instigating the Iraq war.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
_________________________________________________________________________ Saddam violated surrender agreements made at the end of the Persian Gulf War and had his military fire ground to air missiles at U.S. military jets several times between then and the Iraq War. This is not even counting Saddam's crimes against humanity; mass-murders, mass-rapes, torture prisons and use of chemical weapons against civilians. Nor mentioning the various Weapons Inspection debacles. The Dutch just were not looking hard enough.
Good - time to put a bunch of Jewish led neocons in jail.
.
Saddam violated surrender agreements made at the end of the Persian Gulf War and had his military fire ground to air missiles at U.S. military jets several times between then and the Iraq War. Every suckling babe knows that these were not the grounds employed to bludgeon un into acquiescence in the assault on what was left of Saddam's truncated republic. This is not even counting Saddam's crimes against humanity; mass-murders, mass- rapes, torture prisons and use of chemical weapons against civilians. Nor mentioning the various Weapons Inspection debacles. None of which was any of our g-damned business. And thanks for your touching concern for the people of Iraq, but again, nothing which Saddam did in his own country begins to approach in scale the hammering that the Iraqi people got in the wake of our invasion. Neither did it justify the vast treasure squandered there. The Dutch just were not looking hard enough. Eff the Dutch. They're a bit more than a day late and a dollar short. It's us that I'm concerned about. We won't see the light until we're good and broke. We're well on the way there now.
I am not surprised you both believe that dictators should not be held to the agreements they make. Your historical revision is sickening, randge.
Enjoy your war.
Enjoy your willful ignorance.
Like I say, enjoy your war. It's going to be a long one. You and I and all of us here may not see the end of it.
It's going to be a long one. Are talking about the war you and your allies wage against the U.S. culture and U.S. people?
I wage no war, sir. I am against this war for strategic reasons and moral reasons. I have precious few allies. I have so few allies, that even on this board on which there are many anti-war types, no one else has raised a voice to oppose you or support the claims that I've made. Maybe they're just exhausted from years of jawboning this thing. I will say first of all that this war as it has been waged is strategically wrong-headed. In brief, I believe that it is causing more unrest, violence and opposition than it can ever put down even with all its resources. Islamism, which I have as much distate for as any other ecclasiastically based movement that seeks total power, is fed mountains of propaganda fodder by the mere fact of our massed armed presence in Muslim territory. Our methods and actions there, particularly those of our contractors and freebooters there feeds the rage both the religious and the nationalists there. Our actions are only suited to create an equal and opposite reaction. Conventional forces can never win a war of this kind. I also believe that this war is immoral. We encouraged Saddam in his war on Iran and we were the chief suppliers of arms and materiel to him during and after that war. In the UN report prior to our invasion which we tried have kept secret but which was accessed by journalists, it was documented that Western countries supplied the overwhelming share of armaments and military hardware given Saddam from the outside. The two countries at the top of that list were the US and the UK. That was followed by Germany, Italy and France, if I remember correctly. This includes is not limited to weapons of mass destruction such as bio agents and gas weapons. (What was left of those after he was required to destroy these weapons in the wake of the first Gulf war is a still a matter of dispute among the hard headed. It's my belief that what was left was strategically insignificant.) But be all this as it may, it's my point here that we were glad to feed a dictator who marauded his own people while he was marauding them, and that we turned a blind eye to his tyranny when it suited our purposes. Then later when it also suited us, we vented the fury that people here felt after 911 on Iraq, turning our attention from Afghanistan where there actually were al Q'aeda to Iraq where there were none. The Iraqi people paid a huge price for our failure to capture bin Ladin. The war we gave them was a punishmment that the Iraqi people did not deserve. If you travel about the globe, our actions are widely seen as hypocritical. While some people in this country may not care in the least how we are seen abroad, our actions have cost us greatly in political capital and goodwill. And now eight years on, we see conflict metastisizing into Pakistan and now into Yemen. There's no telling where or how this will end or what the end game is supposed to be. I wish someone would tell me where all this is going. You accuse me of waging war. You are joking of course. The State has 7 carrier groups at it's disposal, vast networks of bases and big guns, resources on land, sea, air and in space and human and electronic intelligence capabilities at work all over the globe. The State also has had the grudging acceptance of the American people in employing all of these resources in fighting wars that have yielded them no benefit and have cost them plenty in terms of treasure and of life and limb. On the other side, there are just a few puny voices. A few anti- war folks like myself who only type out words on paper and on screens like this one. That's hardly a war. It is the State that rules over us and dictates what it thinks the relevant facts are and that picks our pockets to fight conflicts that WE CANNOT EVEN PAY FOR that is fighting a war. IT has had free rein to fight this war. No one is really putting up a fight here against it. These are the facts as I see them. I speak for no one but myself here. I don't fight for Muslims, or Islamists or Arabs or for anyone else that we see as opposed to us. I am devoted only to my country, and I am sorely grieved to see it headed down the wrong road.
Bump to that.
And thanx for the bump, wudidiz. They can drag me away. They can't keep me from sayin' what I see with my two eyes.
The war you wage is the war of government tyranny against the people. I don't see you speak a word against the government on domestic affairs. I don't hear you speak out against government as it steals the private wealth from U.S. citizens to pay welfare whores and mexican invaders to support the destruction of U.S. culture and it's people. It is only the U.S. military, the one part of the U.S. government that still gives a damn about the U.S. Constitution and nation defense, that you speak out against. Almost all I see you do is parrot the same anti-U.S. propaganda that the press vomits out everyday.
randge's criticisms of big government are well known to anyone who exchanges views with him. See my pings to a brief list of his short, but to the point positions. It's unfortunate that you don't recognize them. Perhaps he didn't write enough to be clear for you, or you didn't read them carefully.
This is not even counting Saddam's crimes against humanity; mass-murders, mass-rapes, torture prisons and use of chemical weapons against civilians. Nor mentioning the various Weapons Inspection debacles. Were any of your "reasons" cited by GWBush to invade Iraq?
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
I've been around a while, but don't post prolifically. If you've caught my posts, you'll know that I am as four-square against the Welfare State as I am opposed to the Warfare State. Just because I am not in accord with our military and foreign policy doesn't mean I'm an effin' Democrat. Lot's of us conservatives and constitutionalists out there that don't like our wars. Ask Chrissie.
They aren't "wars" from a legal definition as Congress hasn't declared war since WW2. These military actions are simply presidential empire building fodder.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Good points, buck. I think though that while his violation of post-Gulf War I agreements and No- FlyZone infractions were added to his rap sheet, Bush couldn't have done Gulf War II without the WMD hoax and fraud along with tarring Saddam with the Osama bin Ladin brush.
Their report is strictly based upon the Dutch involvement. It is a condemnation of their own Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende. It has little impact on or about the US or for that matter anyone else.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Your post is a keeper. Thanks for the clear passion about your sentiment. We need a few more million just like you to kick ALL the political scalawags out of Washington DC.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Bump it.
Yes. That is why Bush went to the UN for five to six months worth of stonewalling by the UN until he had the U.S. act alone.
Not true. GWBush sandbagged the UN by eliminating in large part the documented requirements by Saddam Hussein to show earlier UN sanction results. I was in France at the time and know what was going on. GWBush lied to the UN and he lied to the American people; he even had Colin Powell make a bold-faced lie about WMD. And once GWBush was booed by the UN, the same rat-bastard-empire-builder eliminated any UN security council votes by withdrawing his issue as he knew he fucked upped his own miserable methods. GWBush only used the single ploy of WMD against Saddam Hussein, nothing of or about your reasoning. And as you know, no WMD were ever found.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
You were in France at the time and listening to anti-U.S. press there. Bush went to the UN, and for over five months the UN but stonewall him on doing anything about Iraq. Later, when Iraq was captured by the U.S. military, documents were found that showed that Saddam was giving kickbacks to those at the UN, through the Oil-for-Food program, to stonewall any political measures that threatened Saddam's control of Iraq. In other words, those at the UN was guilty of accepting bribes from Saddam.
If you ever decide to step outside the box, you will find that anti-American sentiment is worldwide for the shenanigans that American foreign policy performs. But beyond all that the USA is a security council member and derailed Hussein's documentation required by the UN. After the uproar in the general assembly, the USA then revolked it's own plea for UN support within the security council as there was no way it would pass. GWBush fucked-upped from the beginning.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
lighten up on paully he only knows what dickcheesey tells him.
You are the one with his head in a box, the box called "willful ignorance". I pointed out how you are wrong. You say you got your sources from while in France. Well, the French press are one of the most bigoted anti-U.S. press groups on the planet.
Butt out, torqy.
Dutch Greens are pushing for a parliamentary probe to get evidence under oath from politicians who backed the US-led invasion of Iraq.
Could you please tell me what the ideology of the "Dutch Greens" is?
Who are you sir, to tell anyone to butt out of an argument here? You know, it rang a bit comical to read "I was in France at the time and listening to anti-U.S. press there." But there's a point there that shouldn't be missed. There's a lot of just plain news that we don't get here past the mainstream filter. Were you aware that at the time Saddam was committing his crimes against humanity. the mass-murders, the mass-rapes, the tortures, the use of chemical weapons against civilians, we were happily shipping him millions of tons of grain which he was happily selling on the international market, using the proceeds to further oppress his people? Folks at the Agriculture Department were becoming concerned about the legality of these operations which required its stamp of approval. The Department wrote a letter to Sec'y of State James Baker who wrote back in effect, "Relax, he's our buddy. Don't get your panties in a bunch." Did hear about our grain sales on the NBC Nightly News? What some folks call anti-American propaganda is often just reporting of facts we find are discomforting to hear.
2. What some folks call anti-American propaganda is often just reporting of facts we find are discomforting to hear. 1. IRTorqued comment was flame towards me. Flaming serves no constructive purpose. So, I told him to butt out. Or do you wish for this to turn into a flame war? Personally, I am against that. 2. You forget that those who make such accusations, which you repeat, have their own agendas. And most of those agendas are meant to hurt the U.S. population.
Reporting facts is not "making allegations", it is simply reporting historical documented facts. The news is tightly controlled as it is, would you rather see it so that only propaganda is allowed to be fed to the populace?
1. IRTorqued comment was flame towards me. Flaming serves no constructive purpose. So, I told him to butt out. Or do you wish for this to turn into a flame war? Personally, I am against that. Point taken. Let's all keep it civil here. 2. You forget that those who make such accusations, which you repeat, have their own agendas. And most of those agendas are meant to hurt the U.S. population. I tender this: The FACTS strongly support the conclusion that we support butchers when it suits us. When is no longer suits us, we excoriate them and bring their ugly house of cards down - even when we had a demonstrable hand in building up that house of cards.
Every one and every source has an agenda. That is what I am pointing out.
2. I tender this: The FACTS strongly support the conclusion that we support butchers when it suits us. 3. When is no longer suits us, we excoriate them and bring their ugly house of cards down - even when we had a demonstrable hand in building up that house of cards. 1. I am glad we agree on that. 2. A tragic fact that I will not argue with you on. 3. Only when the butchers violate their agreements with the U.S., which Saddam did. At the top of the thread, I pointed out how Saddam violated his surrender agreements (post 3). And I also pointed out later that the UN refused to offer a solution because they were being bribed by Saddam (post 26).
So what's YOUR agenda Paul?
Which agreement was that? What led to the FIRST Gulf War in other words...
Then maybe the US should stop backing criminals. Scumbags like Saddam wouldn't make it past used car salesman if not for the help of "American foreign policy".
Comments (42 - 132) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWould be interesting to know if the 550-page report identified the Israel agents in the US administration who were primarily responsible for instigating the Iraq war.
"This man is Jesus,” shouted one man, spilling his Guinness as Barack Obama began his inaugural address. “When will he come to Kenya to save us?”
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#2. To: X-15, Tatarewicz (#1)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#3. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
(Edited)
Dutch panel finds Iraq war had no legal mandate
#4. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
Dutch panel finds Iraq war had no legal mandate
#5. To: PaulCJ, all (#3)
The Dutch just were not looking hard enough.
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#6. To: PaulCJ (#3)
#7. To: randge, wudidiz (#6)
#8. To: PaulCJ (#7)
#9. To: randge (#8)
(Edited)
Enjoy your war.
#10. To: PaulCJ (#9)
(Edited)
#11. To: randge (#10)
Like I say, enjoy your war.
#12. To: PaulCJ (#11)
#13. To: randge (#12)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#14. To: wudidiz (#13)
#15. To: randge (#12)
(Edited)
#16. To: PaulCJ, randge (#15)
#17. To: PaulCJ (#3)
Saddam violated surrender agreements made at the end of the Persian Gulf War and had his military fire ground to air missiles at U.S. military jets several times between then and the Iraq War.
#18. To: PaulCJ (#15)
#19. To: randge (#18)
Lot's of us conservatives and constitutionalists out there that don't like our wars.
#20. To: buckeroo (#17)
#21. To: randge (#6)
Eff the Dutch. They're a bit more than a day late and a dollar short. It's us that I'm concerned about.
#22. To: randge (#12)
#23. To: randge, *Up to the Sun* (#12)
I am devoted only to my country, and I am sorely grieved to see it headed down the wrong road.
#24. To: buckeroo (#17)
Were any of your "reasons" cited by GWBush to invade Iraq?
#25. To: PaulCJ (#24)
#26. To: buckeroo (#25)
I was in France at the time and know what was going on.
#27. To: PaulCJ (#26)
You were in France at the time and listening to anti-U.S. press there.
#28. To: buckeroo (#27)
computer counted ballots are ballots that have been counted in secret, and with all probability not the way one voted.
#29. To: buckeroo (#27)
If you ever decide to step outside the box, you will find that anti-American sentiment is worldwide for the shenanigans that American foreign policy performs.
#30. To: IRTorqued (#28)
lighten up on paully he only knows what dickcheesey tells him.
#31. To: All (#0)
#32. To: Tatarewicz (#31)
#33. To: PaulCJ (#30)
Butt out, torqy.
#34. To: randge (#33)
(Edited)
1. Who are you sir, to tell anyone to butt out of an argument here?
#35. To: PaulCJ, randge (#34)
You forget that those who make such accusations, which you repeat, have their own agendas. And most of those agendas are meant to hurt the U.S. population.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#36. To: PaulCJ (#34)
#37. To: FormerLurker (#35)
(Edited)
Reporting facts is not "making allegations", it is simply reporting historical documented facts.
#38. To: randge (#36)
(Edited)
1. Point taken. Let's all keep it civil here.
#39. To: PaulCJ (#37)
Every one and every source has an agenda. That is what I am pointing out.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#40. To: PaulCJ (#38)
Only when the butchers violate their agreements with the U.S., which Saddam did.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#41. To: PaulCJ (#3)
This is not even counting Saddam's crimes against humanity
.
.
.