Iraq - a lost or a won war?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew73.php

It was legal.

 

Oh No It Wasn't!

 

Your arguement would be more convincing if the link you provided actually supported it.

From your link:
new resolutions, authorizing force, would be necessary before the US or any other country could carry out lawful enforcement action in respect to any Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Resolution 1441 provides no new authorization for using force.

Just as I told you.

The invasion was unlawful.

 

Unlawful to the UN. Which I do not give one rat's ass about.

 

Like Hitler about the League of Nations. Why should anyone give a rat's arse about your opinion then? God, are you?

 

The heart of the Americanism is individual liberty. Granted a lot Americans dont care about that any more but there a plenty who will always refuse direction from a central government wheather thats from Washington DC or elsewhere.

But

We are so close to a full blown dictatorship where a Hitler type leader is not too far-fetched.

There are plenty of folks in America who want to commit genocide against Muslims and Mexicans. I read about it all the time on conservative forums.

With new power being granted to the POTUS and less powers given to the people, I see where you are coming from in needing to obey international laws made by government bodies. However, as I said before right or wrong the American spirit of individual liberty will always refuse.

 

If they showed any individuality I'd be all for it. In fact they obey Fox like brainwashed slaves.

 

No - unlawful under the "supreme law of the land" of US law.

And the fact that the unlawful invasion was carried out and torture was used - US Law seems to be something your Government does not give one rat's ass about.

The USA is a signatory to the UN Charter - and the UN Charter is a treaty made under the Authority of the United States

Article 6 - US Constitution:
...all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land

 

You really believe you are head and shoulders above the rest, do you?

Americans are superior, are you?

How many languages does the average american speak?

How many lingos does he/she need to learn to finish highschool?

You know nothing about this world, except for what happens within your 50 states.

If you would only know who little you really are.

How could one nation loose so much respect as yours has lost since WW2?

Well easy answered, in denying to ever do something wrong, and in believing you are superior.....

 

Pathetic, desperate and dumb.

Tick tick tick for you.

 

Who, you?

Why can't soldiers use their brains?
Is a Bradley Manning a hero for you or a traitor?

You don't need to answer, as we all know your answer anyway....

 

Bradley Manning is a decent 'Welsh' boy. They are doing a play about him over in his old school in Dyfed. Someone to be proud of.

 

An illegal invasion is not something for individual soldiers to answer for, but for the political and military leadership.

Unless you want to put probably 200,000+ people on trial and imprison them god knows where? Because that sounds very clever.

Any war crimes committed by soldiers on the ground they should of course be held accountable for, but not for the invasion itself.

The legality of the Iraq war is in dispute, but it will probably never go to trial.

And FFS it is "LOSE" not "LOOSE" m2catter, why the hell are there so many people on this forum who all make the same spelling mistakes? Something very dodgey about that.

 

No - that is not correct.

While in purely practical terms - yes - individual soldiers will never have to answer for partaking in an illegal invasion. But that still does not excuse soldiers for carrying out an illegal act. I would like to think that the people we give guns to can actually think for themselves and tell right from wrong.

That is how you can tell the really brave soldiers from rest:

It was my duty to refuse to go to Iraq, says first American army officer facing court martial
The first American army officer to face court-martial for refusing to serve in Iraq said yesterday that it was his duty to recognise and refuse "illegal" orders. Lt Ehren Watada, 28, faces four charges of conduct unbecoming an officer for his refusal to join his unit in Iraq in the summer. Speaking ahead of a pre-trial hearing, the conscientious objector pledged that he would "fight with everything I have for my freedom and that of all Americans. I will face imprisonment to stand up for my beliefs."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...erican-army-officer-facing-court-martial.html

You don't forfeit your responsibility to be a decent human being just because you put a uniform on

 

you do forfeit your right to be a soldier when you refuse to go to war

 

So in your opinion - you forfeit your right to be a human being when you become a soldier.

I really don't think soldiers are that stupid. It is sad you have such a low opinion of them.

 

Yes it is correct. If a law is not practical then it is irrelevant. Soldiers can personally object, but they do not carry the blame for an illegal invasion.

It is not their decision, they do not have the relevant information to make such a decision and so it is left to the political and military leadership and their legal advisers. It is not for individual soldiers to know that an invasion is illegal when the leader of the country and the head of the defence forces are telling them that it is legal.

The invasion is on very shaky legal grounds but it is not definitively "illegal". And as I said it will almost certainly never go to trial, or not in time for it to matter.

As with your link, they face prosecution for disobeying orders.

It is just your opinion that this particular soldier was "braver" than those who went to war. Being prosecuted for refusing orders is not "braver" than following orders that they believed to be legal and in the best interests of our country facing the very real possibility of a gruesome death.

It is perhaps more intelligent, but not "braver".

 

Ziggy,
not sure about that.
Since WW2, we have helped the US in various countries, and certainly not to protect our homesoil, Australia.
Knowing that, I think it is brave for a soldier to stand up and say no when he is confronted by a new marching order, say his next trip will be to Iran....
We need to return to a situation, where the definition of defence and aggression are newly discussed, by our leadership I mean. Of course the outcome for the Libs is clear, the outcome for Labor as well, not too much hope, is there?
And how much are we willing or prepared to do for our so called friendship to other nations, namely the US? Will we ever ask the question?
Merry X-mas everyone

 

we really have to ask ourselves, what are we doing?
Is it that what we want? Is this protecting our values? Does this mean we welcome our heroes back home? So many questions, so little answers....

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/12/2011122410393160361.html

 

Not sure about what?

Sure a soldier is "brave" to disobey orders for what he believes is right. But he is certainly not "braver" than the soldier who goes to war and dies for what he believes is right.

Ok, say his next trip is to Iran, what is your point?

This "so called friendship" with the USA is a formal alliance we have had with them for 60 years. They are the sole super power, and will be one of the great powers in the world for a long time yet.

Of course that question has been asked, and of course it will be continue to be asked.

 

My point? To help to invade one country after another, and illegal?
Formal alliance? Super power?
One upon a time there was a a super power, eg. Rome and Italy a long time ago, and before that others, and after that others.
Last century then US and Russia, both now dying, because they tried to hold on which isn't theirs. And didn't grow or mature because both never admitted any mistakes.
A super power will soon become China, India, as the US have just lost it. Way too arrogant, way too selfish.
Will others be wiser? Who knows......

 

Uncle Ferd says we won it...

... but dem Iraqis is about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

Catter the Iraq War is OVER , the troops home , your Austrailian soldiers /pilots as well as ours . . the stories of Iraqui Freedom and Iron Eagle are filled with such patriots that fought gallantly for Justice , and that's a good thing to fight for , my opinion ..

Was it worth it ? I honestly hope so , but I fear 4 the new Iraq Gov't .

Whether or not Iraq protects and establishes in their culture the new idea of their Democracy ,,, well , Catter , I guess time will tell , , it's up to them to decide for themselves , we should just get out of there and let Israel handle the Middle East , my opinion

 

In most countries freedom for crooks to make a lot of money is not regarded as much of an aim, let alone politics organised by religion (as it never was under Saddam). Nothing is over: the squalid, murderous mess the imperialists have made will go on for decades.