It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by GT100FV
Can you show me major news sources that provide evidence that George Bush Sr. sold Iraq WMD?
Originally posted by marg6043
Tell me where you can link me to Saddam preparing to attack the US prior to the invasion.
Originally posted by marg6043
Show me the bombs he had prepare the terrorist groups of Iraqis getting ready to strike our nation.
Originally posted by marg6043
Excuse me Muaddib, but you knew that a long time ago, Is my constitutional right to criticize my Nations elected leaders when they deviate from their role as leaders to protect their private interest and going on a war path with a nation for profits for the private interest they serve.
Originally posted by marg6043
Are you afraid of the government? because I am not.
Originally posted by marg6043
Is very clear that Saddam was once considered a friend of the US when it was to the best interest of the government that rule our nation, they didn't care about what he was doing to his people but as long as he was a friend and did what US wanted he was OK.
Originally posted by marg6043
Our nation's leaders and government has a record of supporting, despots, feudal monarchies and totalitarian governments as long as the nations they rule are friendly of the US.
Are you going to denied that?
Originally posted by marg6043
Yes if our elected government wanted to take Iraq it should not have lie and should have come clean on the purpose of the invasion.
Because how many times it has to be told that Saddam didn't have MWDs, and he was not an Al-qaida member.
Originally posted by marg6043
If our president was smart he would have made a good job of that invasion, but guess what, when you do things for the wrong reasons and thousands of death are the result of your stupidity and mistakes . . .
We pay in this life for what we do to others.
And bush will go into history as a failure as a war wagging president.
Even his father was smarter than him.
Pity.
understanding the nature of an event after it has happened; "hindsight is always better than foresight"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Originally posted by df1
Frankly I'm surprised that partisan supporters of the administration have the hubris to even bring up the subject of Iraq's WMDs. Any WMDs that Saddam ever had were provided by Bush I, Rumsfeld & Cheney and any evidence that Saddam still had WMDs prior to the current invasion of Iraq was fabricated to justify executing plans made by PNAC even before Bush II was elected.
.
War crimes
§ 2441. War crimes
- (a) Offense. — Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
- (b) Circumstances. — The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
- (c) Definition. — As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.
Memos Reveal War Crimes Warnings
Could Bush administration officials be prosecuted for 'war crimes' as a result of new measures used in the war on terror? The White House's top lawyer thought so.
The White House's top lawyer warned more than two years ago that U.S. officials could be prosecuted for "war crimes" as a result of new and unorthodox measures used by the Bush administration in the war on terrorism, according to an internal White House memo and interviews with participants in the debate over the issue.
Bush's Crimes
Since George W. Bush came to power, he has systematically flouted international agreements that the US had previously signed up to. While previous US administrations might not be able to claim much better records, it is clear that Bush is not even making an attempt to stick to these numerous treaties, laws and obligations:
- Rogue State
List of International Obligations violated by George W. Bush
US as nuclear rogue
- International Law Relating to nuclear weapons:
International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
Non Proliferation Treaty
Geneva Conventions Protocol
UN Charter
US Constitution.
- Environmental Agreements:
Failure to Ratify Kyoto Agreement on Climate Change
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Prosecute George W. Bush for War Crimes
George W. Bush ordered a War of Aggression against Iraq. This constitutes a Crime Against Peace - for which Nazi leaders were prosecuted at the Nuremberg Trials - and violates the UN Charter.
- Iraq never attacked the US or threatened an attack, so the US was not acting legally in self-defense, which is permitted under the UN Charter.
- Iraq played no role in the September 11, 2001 attack on the US and never provided material support to any terrorist group that attacked the US, so even the non-legal Bush doctrine of pre-emptive attack did not apply.
- At the time of the US attack, Iraq was nearing full compliance with UN Resolution 1441 and prior resolutions requiring disarmament, and the majority of the Security Council believed UN inspectors should be given more time, so the US was not enforcing UN resolutions, as it claims.
- George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq in order to bring about a regime change, which was never authorized by a UN resolution, and violates the UN Charter.
Bush confesses to war crimes
George W. Bush's speech on September 6 amounted to a public confession to criminal violations of the 1996 War Crimes Act. He implicitly admitted authorizing disappearances, extrajudicial imprisonment, torture, transporting prisoners between countries and denying the International Committee of the Red Cross access to prisoners.
These are all serious violations of the Geneva Conventions. The War Crimes Act makes grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and all violations of Common Article 3 punishable by fines, imprisonment or, if death results to the victim, the death penalty.
At the same time, Bush asked Congress to amend the War Crimes Act in order to retroactively protect him and other U.S. officials from prosecution for these crimes, and from civil lawsuits arising from them. He justified this on the basis that "our military and intelligence personnel involved in capturing and questioning terrorists could now be at risk of prosecution under the War Crimes Act . . . ," and insisted that “passing this legislation ought to be the top priority” for Congress between now and the election in November.
Bush 'Unsigns' War Crimes Treaty
The Bush administration has pulled out of the treaty to establish the International Criminal Court -- a move that is both unprecedented and foolhardy.
The Bush administration Monday formally renounced its obligations as a signatory to the 1998 Rome Statute to establish an International Criminal Court (ICC). Critics say the decision to "unsign" the treaty will further damage the United States' reputation and isolate it from its allies.
"Driven by unfounded fears of phantom prosecutions, the United States has hit a new nadir of isolationism and exceptionalism," said William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International's U.S. section (AIUSA).
Could Bush Be Prosecuted for War Crimes?
A Nuremberg chief prosecutor says there is a case for trying Bush for the 'supreme crime against humanity, an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign nation.'
"The United Nations charter has a provision which was agreed to by the United States formulated by the United States in fact, after World War II. Its says that from now on, no nation can use armed force without the permission of the U.N. Security Council. They can use force in connection with self-defense, but a country can't use force in anticipation of self-defense. Regarding Iraq, the last Security Council resolution essentially said, 'Look, send the weapons inspectors out to Iraq, have them come back and tell us what they've found -- then we'll figure out what we're going to do. The U.S. was impatient, and decided to invade Iraq -- which was all pre-arranged of course. So, the United States went to war, in violation of the charter."
Originally posted by GT100FV
B- The armistice at the end of Desert Storm was conditional, and any violation by Saddam could result in resumption of hostilities(so that whole unlawful war of aggression theory goes down the toilet there).
Originally posted by neformore
........................
Furthermore - the premise used for the justification of the invasion by the US and others was that there was a violation of the conditional status of the ceasefire in '91 and that Iraq posed a direct threat to the United States and other countries - as no WMD's that were/are viable weapons have been found there is direct evidence that the premise that is was a "lawful" war has been flushed right down the toilet.