Originally Posted by dr325i
Clearly charged with:
1) Killing innocent civilians -- then call it all Colleteral Damage (why would not OBL call the 9-11 stuff colleteral damage)?
2) Lying to the UN, then going against UN resolution
3) Shit that happened in Iraq with marines killing 20 innocent Iraquis -- do you think that Milosevic took the gun and killed innocent people -- NO. Others did, but he was charged for that in Hague. What is different with W?
4) Occupying the sovereign country because he thought they had... Then he admitted it was a false intel
Next -- Saddam uset bio weapon on his own people and killed 10k of them -- bad thing!
However, the USA is THE ONLY country in the history of human kind that have used the WMD against the other nation and in asecond wiped out 250k citizens of Japan, then used Geneva prohibited Napal and Cluster bombs in Vietnam, Bosnia and Kosovo!!! So, who would you trust now buddy???
Enough of that propaganda crap that I hear every day on TV. Get the facts then talk to me.
And DO NOT involve the UN or any normal Government with Iraq at all, please.
I see your knowledge of international law is on par with your military expertise.
1. Civilians die in wars. Unfortunate it is true but unless the civilians were the intended target of the operation their deaths are neither illegal nor immoral.
2. What UN resolution was violated? UNSCR 678 authorized military force be used against Iraq to enforce UNSCR 660 and all subsequent resolutions relating to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. The ceasefire agreement, UNSCR 687, was one of those subsequent resolutions. UNSCR 1441 found Iraq in material breach of its obligations under 687. By what standard was any further authorization required?
3. The difference is that Milosevic was charged with ordering his army to murder non-combatants. If the Marines did murder civilians, a fact I am not willing to concede, you would have to have evidence that they were ordered to do so and that the orders came from the White House.
4. You seem to be unwilling to accept the fact that EVERYBODY believed Iraq retained a chemical and bio weapons capability. The UN thought they did. The onus was on Iraq to prove to the satisfaction of the inspectors that they did not. They failed to do so and paid the price.
Your grasp of history is lacking as well.
Saddam used chemical weapons against Iran as well as aganst the Kurds.
Where in the Geneva Conventions are napalm and cluster bombs prohibited?