It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Make Wars History

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:00 AM
Hello everyone

This thread was inspired by the following website: Make Wars History

Make Wars History is an association of peace activists working to end war. Horrified at the casual way in which the US and UK Governments violated international law by waging war on Iraq and Afghanistan killing thousands of innocent people, peace activists set up an international civil obedience campaign to force Coalition Governments and leaders to obey the laws of war.

Politicians who start wars break the law and breach their oaths of office. To be effective the laws of war require politicians to obey them, police to enforce them, the public to uphold them and offenders to answer to them in court.

For years now I have been promoting peace and damning war. Growing up in the era of the Afghanistan-Iraq wars was a brutal introduction to humanities darker side. Surely it can't get worse than this?

Well it does.

The only thing worse than war is illegal war.

Surely now we have leverage? They have broken the law and should be punished. How long can we keep letting them get away with this?

The White House Legal Brief

On March 13th 2002 at a Press Briefing in the White House, Ari Fleischer, then but now, ex- Presidential spokesman, was asked about the legality of a war on Iraq.

He read, from an obviously prepared statement,

“The UN Security Council Resolution 678 authorised use of all means to uphold UN Security Council resolution 660 and subsequent resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.”

In fact 678 authorised the use of force only to remove Iraqi military forces from Kuwait, not to invade Iraq.

“Thereafter,” Fleischer stridently continued, “687 declared a cease fire …. And provides then legal grounds for the use of force.”

The UN Charter The 1945 UN Charter Article 2 , states,

“must refrain..from the use of force against or the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”…except under certain narrowly defined circumstances.”

“Member states must seek a solution to disputes through the Security Council (Art 33) and the Security Council, which will determine what action to take” (Art 39)

It is only the Security Council that can decide upon the use of force :

“Plans for the application of force shall be made by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee..” (Art 48)

“Member states may use force but only the Security Council is empowered to provide the authority to use force.” (Art 48)

An exception is the attack by another state (Art 51), this includes an imminent attack. There is no suggestion either before, during or after the invasion that there was any prospect of such an attack on any member state. Although of course the Murdoch press had given a lot of the people who look at the headlines on the front page before the tits on Page 3, the idea that Cyprus was under imminent threat from missiles, and remotely controlled planes spraying God knows what. So when the Bush / Blair gang invaded Iraq, it was not simply “by-passing” the Security Council, it was flagrantly ignoring it.

That's what criminals do.

Now, in light of recent events, we are seeing casualties on home soil......collateral damage.

Collateral Damage from Illegal Iraq - Afghanistan Wars

The mayhem at Fort Hood in Texas, which has left 13 men and women dead and 30 injured, is a byproduct of the brutal wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. It is a form of “collateral damage” for which the American political and military establishment is ultimately responsible.

The US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan have now lasted a combined 14 and a half years. Not only is there no end in sight in either case, there is the prospect of the wars’ expansion into Pakistan, with bloodier and more disastrous consequences. The invasions have already led to the devastation of Iraqi and Afghan society, the deaths of as many as a million Iraqis alone, and thousands of Americans killed, or maimed.

The wars are not about democracy, overthrowing tyrants, or protecting the American people from terrorism. The US ruling elite is waging these interventions to seize control of critical energy supplies, to strengthen its position vis à vis its rivals in Europe and Asia, to gain global hegemony through its military superiority.

The impact of these neo-colonial wars, including the moral impact of the enormous gulf between the “official story” and harsh reality, must find expression within sections of the US military itself. To fight an unpopular war against a hostile population is a demoralizing and inevitably brutalizing experience.

War is Hell.


posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:09 AM

Lord Bingham, a former Lord Chief Justice, has said that the legal advice given by the attorney-general to the Blair government was fatally flawed. This is because there was no proof that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) actually existed, nor that Saddam Hussein had failed to comply with the United Nations’s inspection requirements. He said also that Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, should have made it clear that it was the secretary-general of the United Nations who would decide whether there had been compliance and whether further action was necessary. If Lord Bingham is correct, Lord Goldsmith shares responsibility for a serious breach of international law – as serious as it is possible to be.

Lord Goldsmith’s response to this was, more or less, that this was merely Lord Bingham’ opinion and a lot of other countries went into Iraq with the UK anyway. That does not wash. Lord Bingham is the most senior law figure to have come to this view and it has never been a legal justification to say “everyone else did it”.

The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.

He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally.

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 11:12 AM
It doesn't hurt to dream. But i think that humans will always find a reason to kill eachother over... unfortunate but true we are still just animals

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:05 PM
reply to post by conspiracyrus

It doesn't hurt to dream.

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
- John Lennon (Imagine)


posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:46 PM
Any student of History will tell you that War is inevitable. It is to much a part of the Human Condition to assume that it will ever go away. History is replete with examples, and those that have embraced an intentionally peaceful existence have only found extinction at the hands of those that don't.

However, there is a big difference between a Defensive War, a justified War, and an illegal War.

I'm all for Defensive War against an aggressor. If an occupying force were to invade my country, I would not hesitate to take up arms in defense of the country I would otherwise criticize.

A justified War I would have moral quandaries about, but may accept it as a necessary evil. WW2 was such an instance. WW1, Korea, Vietnam, and every War since I don't believe were justifiable Wars and have been morally opposed to them.

Illegal Wars are reprehensible in every conceivable shape and form.

In War, there are no victors except for Death herself. War should be avoided at all costs. Diplomacy is always a better alternative to War.

However, since the formation of the Military Industrial Complex, vast amounts of money have been gained from the promulgation of War. Even Eisenhower, the man who created the Military Industrial Complex for the benefit of the Allies in WW2, couldn't dismantle it after the war, even as POTUS, and warned what it would do in the years to come in his last Presidential Address to the Nation.

We are not talking about Billions of dollars being made on War anymore, but Trillions. We are talking about the GNP of all of the 2nd and 3rd World Nations combined! We are talking about the GNP of all the 1st World Nations excepting the US combined! War is profitable, and for so long as it remains so, Wars will be orchestrated and instigated without end.

It is noble to take a stand against War, especially unjust Wars, and illegal Wars. However, it is unlikely to have any lasting effect.

If one wants to put an end to Wars, then they would seek to find a way to make War no longer profitable to the Weapons Manufacturers and accomplish something that even Eisenhower could not do as POTUS, and with the intimate knowledge as the one who designed the Military Industrial Complex to begin with.

top topics

log in