Genocide???

[Unforgiven]

Those responsible were tried and convicted.

Oh like hell they were. They walked out without a single reprimand once the pictures were made public. A few scape goats aside, there was no responsibility taken at all. An unfortunate commentary on American culture these days.

Exaggerations with no evidence.

Not in the slightest

Not yet. Patience is a virtue.

Hey by all means, walk about with your head held high and proudly proclaim a victory. This way we know where to start cleaning house. ;-)

Twelve years of evasive maneuvers on behalf of Saddam Hussein doesn’t sound like like too early to me. But you’re right, perhaps we should of let it go on another decade.

12 years of Saddam rendered a tempest in a tea cup. Face it, he played Bush like a violin and Bushco played the rest of you like a free Beatles record.
There were no WMD and no indication that there were any nukes or otherwise except for the lies Bushco sold to the American people who were horny to beat on someone anyway. Maybe you should have finished with Osama, who is still roaming around free as a bird I might add.

Well then next time a soldier of yours commits a crime send him over to the ICC, I’m sure that will make you proud. In the meantime, we’ll do things our way.

You don't have a your way. Other than gloating on the Internet and providing the text people use to justify things like flying planes full of civilians into buildings full of civilians. Feel free to head on over to Iraq and walk the walk you talk so much about. Or do you leave that for others to do for you?

Foreign aid is a political move, nothing more. Less than 25% of all aid gets to where it is supposed to go.

Christmas must be a riot at the I think Not homestead.

Welcome to the real world.

Yes you should come join us in the real world.

Which is why we opted for a representative republic.

Opt nothing, it was there long before you showed up. That some sneaky buggers came along and corrupted it for their own use to leave the American people standing there hold the bill just goes to show how gullible the average American is.

OK I’ll put my arrogant American hat on now, just to fit your preconceived notions.

Like it was ever removed?

Nobody has to ask us to do anything, we do what we want when we want it.

But you just said you were asked. Here it is to remind you of what you just said.

"Another reason would be the US is asked to go, where no one else goes. Yes our "Global Reach" carries consequences and responsibilities. Should this absolve American soldiers from committing crimes? Absolutely not"

So you've just contradicted exactly what you said earlier. Are you having a problem keeping your story straight? These are supposed to be your opinions so there must be some reason for you to stumble all over them like this.

America has been hated by the elitists before America was even born. Not surprising.

Elitists like those who go where ever they want and do what ever they like?
Those would be Americans ITN. I do see an element of self loathing in American culture. Maybe this is symptomatic of a deeper issue.

Whoever looked up to the US before Iraq, continues to do so today. Leftists never looked up to America, don’t flatter yourself.

Take a pin and poke it in your head so some of that hot air gets let out.
You slapping some label on anyone who disagrees with your warped idea of America and justice doesn't make it so.

Plenty of people look up to the USA as it is a great country. Always has been and always will be in my opinion. Just because it now and again has surges of very ignorant people bringing their prejudices to the highest reaches of government and driving the country in a most dishonourable direction through acts that are carried out without question because Americans are loyal, faithful and believe in their country even when hoodwinked by the worst examples of American greed and jingoism doesn't mean the country as a whole is made up of that.

Yep, I just love them term limits.

I would imagine you do in that it give the apathetic hope that at some point you and a government that has brought the country to this low state will inevitably be tossed out the window and some reasonable group can come clean up the mess you've made.

I would only ask that Americans learn from these mistakes and not allow such poor examples into power again.

 

[Niflmir]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Article 2[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](a) Killing members of the group; [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.[/FONT]
​

Intent is a slippery concept to define a crime on, a better concept is the guilty mind, which includes criminal intent, recklessness and negligence.

Imagine somebody being shot. If homicide is defined as successful and intentional human slaying, then there is no recourse to self defense, yet "I didn't know a bullet would kill somebody" would be. The example I pose is ridiculous and meant to show why the common notion of intent is such a blunt and poor legal idea. Which is precisely why there are different forms of homicide. Homicide is simply the unlawful killing of a person, and then the level of the criminal mind can determine punishments.

The Pact of Paris and the Covenant of the League of Nation and now the Charter of the United Nations forbids the recourse to war. In terms of the Pact of Paris,

Quoting from...
...the contracting States declared that they condemned “recourse to war for the solution of international controversies” and renounced it “as an instrument of national policy”.

The problem with the current international law is that it forbids war of aggression but has currently failed to provide a definition for it. Because of the preceding fact, currently a war of aggression can only be called so in international politics if the five permanent security council members agree to it. The hypocrisy of that fact in light of the current discussion should be apparent.

In light of the foregoing, one can also see the difficulty of attempting to label genocide to the current situation on the international level. So long as "agressor" cannot be pinned onto the USA, the opposing forces can be considered as belligerants. Then the fact that they are united into a group or genus under their old nationality becomes irrelevant, the recourse to defense against a belligerant is enshrined in international law regardless if it leads to the extermination of the whole or a part of a National group. Here intent is usurped by the right to defense against a belligerant.

Similarly, intent can be overriden by accident. One can experiment with gene targeting viruses and accidentally release a virus that wipes out all the blond haired individuals on the planet (and the recessive gene carriers), but it would not be considered genocide. The missing ingredient here is negligence. The missing ingredient above is the lack of recourse to self defense as an excusing factor.

 

[JBeee]

None Dare Call It Genocide

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [/FONT]
window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.location.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]How comfy we are all in the United States, as we engage in living-room debates about the US occupation of Iraq, whether "we" are bringing them freedom and whether their freedom is really worth the sacrifice of so many of our men and women. We talk about whether war aims have really been achieved, how to exit gracefully, or whether we need a hyper-surge to finish this whole business once and for all. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But there's one thing Americans don't talk about: the lives of Iraqis, or, rather, the deaths of Iraqis. It's interesting because we live in an age of extreme multiculturalism and global concern. We adore international aid workers, go on mission trips abroad, weep for the plight of those suffering from hunger and disease, volunteer in efforts to bring plumbing to Ecuador, mosquito nets to Rwanda, clean water to Malawi, human rights to Togo, and medicine to Bangladesh. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But when "we" cause the calamity, suddenly there is silence. There is something odd, suspicious, even disloyal about a person who would harp on the deaths of Iraqis since the US invasion in 2003. Maybe a person who would weep for Iraq is really a terrorist sympathizer. After all, most of the deaths resulted from "sectarian violence," and who can stop crazed Islamic sects from killing each other. Better each other than us, right?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Well, it's about time that we think about the numbers, even though the US military has decided that body counts are not worth their time. Opinion Research Business, a highly reputable polling firm in the UK, has just completed a detailed and rigorous survey of Iraqis. In the past, the company's results have been touted by the Bush administration whenever the data looks favorable to the US cause. But their latest report received virtually no attention in the US. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Here is the grisly bottom line: more than one million people have been murdered in Iraq since the US invasion, according to the ORB. Yes, other estimates are lower, but you have to be impressed by what they have found. It seems very credible. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In Baghdad, where the US presence is most pronounced, nearly half of households report having lost a family member to a killing of some sort. Half the deaths are from gunshot wounds, one-fifth from car bombs, and one-tenth from aerial bombs. The total number of dead exceeds the hugely well-publicized Rwandan genocide in 1994. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]You are welcome to inspect the detailed data. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Aside from the astonishing detail, what jumps out at me is the number of dead who are neither Sunni nor Shia. It is also striking how the further geographically you move from US troop activity, the more peaceful the area is. Americans think they are bringing freedom to Iraq, but the data indicate that we are only bringing suffering and death. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]If you have ever lost a family member, you know that life is never the same again. It causes every manner of religious, social, and marital trauma. It's bad enough to lose a family member to some disease. But to a cold-blooded killing or a car bomb or an airplane bomb? That instills a sense of fury and motivation to retribution. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]So we are speaking of some 1.2 million people who have been killed in this way, and that does not count the numbers that were killed during the invasion itself for the crime of having attempted to oppose invading foreign troops, or the 500,000 children and old people killed by the US-UN anti-civilian sanctions in the 10 previous years. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]And let's not flatter ourselves into thinking that these are nothing but ragheads killing each other for no good reason. Just this past weekend, there is an example in point. Some of the legendary contractors for the State Department were driving through the Sunni neighborhood of Mansour in Baghdad. They were driving their SUVs when witnesses reported an explosion of fire that lasted 20 minutes. The SUVs drove off, leaving at least nine people dead on the road. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Why? No one knows. Sure there will be investigations. There have already been apologies. The company in question has had its license to practice occupation revoked by the Iraqi government. For how long, no one knows. But these are merely symbolic gestures. There will be no justice, and no forgetting. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]To the extent anyone pays attention to this stuff, they only hear the words of the State Department spokesman: "The bottom line is that the secretary wants to make sure that we do everything we possibly can to avoid the loss of innocent life."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In light of the one million plus figure, such statements come off as evil jokes. The US has unleashed bloodshed in Iraq that is rarely known even in countries we think of as violent and torn by civil strife. It is amazing to think that this has occurred in what was only recently a liberal and civilized country by the region’s standards. This was a country that had a problem with immigration, particularly among the well-educated and talented classes. They went to Iraq because it was the closest Arab proxy to Western-style society that one could find in the area. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]It was the US that turned this country into a killing field. Why won’t we face this? Why won't we take responsibility? The reason has to do with this mysterious thing called nationalism, which makes an ideological religion of the nation's wars. We are god-like liberators. They are devil-like terrorists. No amount of data or contrary information seems to make a dent in this irreligious faith. So it is in every country and in all times. Here is the intellectual blindness that war generates. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Such blindness is always inexcusable, but perhaps more understandable in a time when information was severely restricted, when technological limits actually prohibited us from knowing the whole truth at the time. What excuse do we have today? Our blindness is not technological but ideological. We are the good guys, right? Every nation believes that about itself, but freedom is well served by the few who dare to think critically. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]An essential postulate of the Western idea, or so we tell ourselves, is the universal and ultimate value of human life. And indeed it is true. No person or group of people is without value – not even those whom our own government chooses to label the enemy.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]September 18, 2007[/FONT]​

 

[YoungJoonKim]

I thank Jean Christien-for once-not going to Iraq war (Oh..sorry, Bush's War) and deliberately coughing at George W. Bush's demand for Canada to join the Iraq War.
Thank him, for we don't have to take responsibility of what happened and happens in Iraq as much*.

 

[#juan]

Just a few more thoughts on the topic:

1. If there was an Iraqi culture, it is pretty much gone now.

2. 1.5 million Iraqis have been killed.

3. 3 million Iraqis have fled their homes and country

4. The civilian infrastructure in every major city in Iraq has been destroyed.

5. The Americans have set up at least four, huge, permanent, military bases in Iraq, presumably to help steal the oil.

6. The Iraqis call what has happened "genocide". Can it be called anything else?

 

[gopher]

Genocide is precisely correct thanks to criminal imperialist Bush. The problem remains, why is the world standing by in total silence and submission?

Bush promises the same for Iran, for Syria, for North Korea. Appeasement never worked to stop Hitler and it certainly will not stop Bush's reign of terror. But as Santayana said many years ago, history teaches that mankind learns nothing from history.

 

[Minority Observer84]

State sponsored terrorism rarely gets it's due level of contempt . If the Us does it by definition it cannot be terror murder or genocide

 

[Minority Observer84]

War crimes being committed is your personal opinion. War crimes are thrown around just as easily as genocide. Why not utilize the ICC?

Because The US rejects it . Because if the us were to accept it troops overseas taking part in atrocities like Haditha and Abu ghraib would actually get what they deserve . funny how an iraqi court was good enough for Saddam and not good enough for lindie england .

 

[Minority Observer84]

Even though Sadaam purposely starved his people so he could bring foreign journalist in with their cameras to film hospitals to blame it on sanctions. All this while building massive mansions for himself and keeping every bit of cash for himself and his cohorts. Remember oil for food?

I see.
So Saddam , you former ally and chummy abuses starves , threatens , imprisons without charge , rapes , steals his country's oil and kills thousands of Iraqis . So you depose him so that the US army and black water can pick up right where he left off?

 

[gopher]

No leader in modern history equals the evils of reich wing Suharto who killed more people than did Saddam:

http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/19/2037234.htm?section=justin


To the Republicans, he is a godsend.

 

[Zzarchov]

The Iraqis call what has happened "genocide". Can it be called anything else?

You're right Juan, this is genocide.

I mean, The US army has set up gas chambers and is forcing the Iraqi's into them. All violence is perpetrated by the US death squads and not Iraqi's themselves at all.

Day and night swarms of depraved US soldiers swarm through Iraqi towns hacking screaming civilians into bits with machetes.

The USA spent years swooping into nursaries and injecting Iraqi babies with bacteria..these "Sanctions" were not the result of the Iraqi people and their choices at all.

If this is genocide, then all of this must be true.

 

[#juan]

You're right Juan, this is genocide.

I mean, The US army has set up gas chambers and is forcing the Iraqi's into them. All violence is perpetrated by the US death squads and not Iraqi's themselves at all.

Day and night swarms of depraved US soldiers swarm through Iraqi towns hacking screaming civilians into bits with machetes.

The USA spent years swooping into nursaries and injecting Iraqi babies with bacteria..these "Sanctions" were not the result of the Iraqi people and their choices at all.

If this is genocide, then all of this must be true.

Zzarchov, you are being ridiculous. As far as I know, the Americans have not set up any death squads, or gas chambers, but they did bomb over a million Iraqis to death. They did systematically destroy the infrastructure of every major Iraqi city. They have built huge permanent military bases in Iraq. If you disagree, show me what is the truth. The invasion of Iraq was not to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam as the Americans like to report, but to gain control of the oil.
Now what???
You question my numbers...Show me other numbers.....Why not?? You can't.

Have a good night...

 

[Unforgiven]

It's interesting to look at Iraq through Google Earth. With so many soldiers and other Westerners over there a plethora of pictures are available. You can see for yourself the ruins people still live in.

It's almost a catch 22 situation. The US wants to leave Iraq but only in the hands of friends and strong enough to stand against the enemies of the US. But each day the friends grow fewer and enemies gather.

 

[Minority Observer84]

No leader in modern history equals the evils of reich wing Suharto who killed more people than did Saddam:

http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/19/2037234.htm?section=justin


To the Republicans, he is a godsend.

Or Mubarak
Or The King of KSA
Or Pinochette
Or Batista
The list of tyrants supported by the us in the name of corporate interests and greed is extensive.

 

[Walter]

Since 1.2 million Iraqis have died as a result of the bloody sanctions and the violence of, and because of the invasion, and the overthrow of Saddam,

Very dubious number. http://www.thestar.com/article/258511

 

[Tonington]

Very dubious argument.

 

[Cosmo]

Genocide? According to Internation Law, here is the definition:

Link

Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Emphasis mine.

Look at (a), (b) and (c) ... without even arguing the other points, these three fit the situation of US in Iraq. US calls them "terrorists" and have defined them as a religious group that is being persecuted. Maybe the US isn't after every single soul, but they sure want to put a stop to "jihad" (holy war). The problem is that the term is incorrect, but the intent stands.

Remember Abu Ghraib? Check out what this article had to say about ongoing torture. If that ain't genocide, I'll eat my hat.

The newer cases also appear to substantiate earlier evidence gathered implicating a widespread policy of insult and assault committed against Iraqis charged of no crimes, as well as the systematic targeting of prisoners with particularly strong religious convictions.

Jihad is part of the Muslim religion.

Jihad requires Muslims to "struggle in the way of God" or "to struggle to improve one's self and/or society."

The talking heads on TV and people who are little more than biggots have perverted the term to mean terrorists. It's not so. The only violence allowed Muslims is under Jihad, but there are specific rules that say no killing women, kids, etc. The people who perform acts of indiscriminate terror are not true Muslims, not practicing true Jihad, but the term has become synonymous in most peoples' minds. And the US is after these "fringe Muslims".

So yep, genocide fits. An entire culture has been decimated.

 

[EagleSmack]

It actually doesn't fit in the slightest.

 

[EagleSmack]

Just a few more thoughts on the topic:

1. If there was an Iraqi culture, it is pretty much gone now.

2. 1.5 million Iraqis have been killed.

3. 3 million Iraqis have fled their homes and country

4. The civilian infrastructure in every major city in Iraq has been destroyed.

5. The Americans have set up at least four, huge, permanent, military bases in Iraq, presumably to help steal the oil.

6. The Iraqis call what has happened "genocide". Can it be called anything else?

Juan... I love how you start out this thread by saying 1.2 million are dead and here we are on page four and you just added 300,000 to your already bloated number. That poll has already been shot full of holes.

Knock, knock
Yes?
Did you have anyone killed?
Yes... a whole bunch!
How many?
At least 10!
10... got you and thank you.

How very scientific. But that is how the poll was done.

The fact of the matter is that things are getting better over there and EVERYONE knows it. I think the biggest losers will be the people like you who prayed each night for democracy to fail in Iraq because your hate for the Bush Admin.

Which Iraqis? The only ones you will listen too? The only ones you will hear? Ah yes... the rest are US puppets.

 

[Cosmo]

Eaglesmack ... Ok, aside from quibbling about numbers, how do you define the situation in Iraq? Let's just agree that a lot of people have been killed.

Why were they killed? I'm still trying to find out what the hell the U.S. was doing there in the first place. Perhaps if I had an answer that made sense, I would see it's not genocide. School me, man. I've done a ton of reading on this and cannot figure it out.