Bush's War

V

veeraj87

Guest
Frontline had a great program on the War on Iraq, and basically about how the Vice President and Secretary of Defense pushed the President into the war and how they lobbied for it, this is an amazing documentary there is two parts, and has 400+ interviews and several sources cited so its not a flake of an article like most media stations, it was well done further proving the war in Iraq is quite unjust. Hope some of you have seen it if not i have linked the page.
Part 1- http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/
 

reefraff

Active Member
How is the war unjust? Iraq violated the cease fire numerous times. First violation was legal justification under international law to resume the hostilities.
 

sepulatian

Moderator
I recall that day quite vividly. This clip is not new news. The coverage of 9-11 can be swayed and distorted any way that you want it. You have to look at all angles though. The title of the story itself says, in which way, that story is meant to be viewed.
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
u cant judge something until you have seen and heard all the facts, the war in Afghanistan i support whole heartedly but i do not believe we went into Iraq correctly and i am entitled to this view, post 9-11 was supposed to be focused on al-queda this administration has done a great job of trying to draw those connections to iraq there is no doubt in my mind that saddam was a bad man and deserved to be removed, our methods of comencing those attacks were wrong, and can be viewed in this documentary view it, please, reserve judgement until you watch it, fox news does not give this side of the story i can promise u that. they even address how powell was forced to resign... sad that this is what rumsfeld and DICKC. did... they skewed the views of americans and its just terrible that we dont get to see the other side... so i am giving asking you to view it ... you will see powell makign statements, you will see the documents, you will see rumsfeld in action, and most importantly you will see CIA leaders telling you that this was wrong in going to war, we didnt have evidence, we violated the genieva convention because we didnt believe it applied today, Powell asked the president to use the UN but DICKC forced him to believe that there was an eminent threat and that we should attack at once, this is a BS war, i am not sayin i do not support the soldier who fight for the country i am sayin do not support the administrations methods for putting our brave men out there like this, this is wrong to them their families and to the people of america who stand by certian principles, we had no plan as to how we would implement a government this is all under progress now, Rumsfeld on numerous occasions said that it would be fast and simple we would not need many troops although military generals told the congress and public in several RECORDED hearings that it would take SEVERAL HUNDREDS of thousands of troops, (est. 400000) this administration lied, and they need and deserve to take the heat for an unjust war ... so say what you want but watch it see teh facts, see the people YOU BELIEVE saying and doing wrong... its UNJUST! and this is wrong as an AMERICAN i stand by principles..... this administration is not abiding to the principles we stand for PERIOD.
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
One document, entitled "Disease Outbreaks in Iraq," reports that:Conditions are favorable for communicable disease outbreaks, particularly in major urban areas affected by coalition bombing... Infectious disease prevalence in major Iraqi urban areas targeted by coalition bombing (Baghdad, Basrah) undoubtedly has increased since the beginning of Desert Storm... Current public health problems are attributable to the reduction of normal preventive medicine, waste disposal, water purification and distribution, electricity, and the decreased ability to control disease outbreaks.

By attacking infrastructure targets without direct military value, the US intended to pressure the Iraqi leadership by imposing widespread suffering on the civilian population. A US Air force planner stated that "we wanted to let people know, "we're not going to tolerate Saddam Hussein or his regime. Fix that and we'll fix your electricity."30 Similarly, Brig. Gen. Buster Glosson, the architect of the 1991 air campaign, explained that bombing telecommunications was meant to "put every household in an autonomous mode and make them feel they were isolated. I didn't want them to listen to radio stations and know what was happening. I wanted to play with their psyche."

During the first Gulf War, attacks against Iraqi infrastructure by US-led military forces claimed a minimum of 110,000 civilian casualties.

Humanitarian Law and the Right to Water: Potential Violations in Iraq
Humanitarian law, derived from the Geneva and Hague Conventions, places limits on the means and methods of combat. It is built on the fundamental principles of distinction and proportionality.32 Under humanitarian law it is illegal to launch either indiscriminate attacks that do not distinguish between military and civilian targets, or attacks against military targets if the result would be excessive civilian casualties "in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated",33 The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court prohibits "intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives."34
It is also illegal to launch attacks intended to demoralize or spread terror among the civilian population. According to the Geneva Conventions, "It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as... drinking water installations and supplies."35
Depriving civilians of access to safe water whether through direct attacks against water or electricity or the indirect effect of extended blockades--clearly violates these basic principles of international law and constitutes a war crime.

in August 1991 reported the deaths of 47,000 children under the age of five.25 The first United Nations mission to post-war Iraq documented how "apocalyptic damage" to the infrastructure had reduced the country to "the pre-industrial age."

As the UN General Assembly has declared, "Humanitarian assistance must be provided in accordance with the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality",41 These legal principles of humanitarian aid have not been respected by Anglo-American military forces invading Iraq.
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/...N?OpenDocument
 
V

veeraj87

Guest

The primary document, "Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities," is dated January 22, 1991. It spells out how sanctions will prevent Iraq from supplying clean water to its citizens.

The document goes into great technical detail about the sources and quality of Iraq's water supply. The quality of untreated water "generally is poor," and drinking such water "could result in diarrhea," the document says. It notes that Iraq's rivers "contain biological materials, pollutants, and are laden with bacteria. Unless the water is purified with chlorine, epidemics of such diseases as cholera, hepatitis, and typhoid could occur."

The document gives a timetable for the destruction of Iraq's water supplies. "Iraq's overall water treatment capability will suffer a slow decline, rather than a precipitous halt," it says. "Although Iraq is already experiencing a loss of water treatment capability, it probably will take at least six months (to June 1991) before the system is fully degraded."

For more than ten years, the United States has deliberately pursued a policy of destroying the water treatment system of Iraq, knowing full well the cost in Iraqi lives. The United Nations has estimated that more than 500,000 Iraqi children have died as a result of sanctions, and that 5,000 Iraqi children
continue to die every month for this reason.
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0808-07.htm
I bet you Reefraff your gonna think this isnt unjust, how about if you and your family were there as innocent civilians no clean water and your CHILD dies of Diahreaa, SIMPLIED CURED HERE IN AMERICA ... THIS IS UNJUST!

and i know your gonna be a smart guy and challenge the source well the source has provided the links to the documents that the AMERICAN government (BUSH's admin) recieved.
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2535710
How is the war unjust? Iraq violated the cease fire numerous times. First violation was legal justification under international law to resume the hostilities.
please dont give me that BS about this war not being unjust if you were a civilian living in ur own crap becuz there is no sanitation you think so too ! were actually not doing anything good to save those people instead we hold out the good water in hope the bad guys will die first, except were killing THOUSANDS, we havent corrected that water problem, so please were violated the CODE OF ETHICS something im sure you want in your life and are glad we have here in this country something that we stand by, we stand by Humanity and ETHICS!
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2535710
How is the war unjust? Iraq violated the cease fire numerous times. First violation was legal justification under international law to resume the hostilities.
an eye for an eye will make the WORLD go BLIND!
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
you know if this happened to US soldiers we would go crazy here, but because were the ones doing it, who give a crap right???
http://impeachforpeace.org/evidence/pages/torture.html
and im not even really all that upset about this but the water thing is messed up man KIDS are dieing that is messed up, and yes that is intentionally killing on our account those people dieing are innocent, and this doesnt even include the people we have killed through military goof ups. thats just shameful
its disgraceful that our current president and media stations dont want us to know the truth...... geez
 
V

veeraj87

Guest
Wilson was sent to Africa to find out if Niger had sold tanks of uranium to Saddam/Iraq, the CIA believed that this was not a valid threat however Cheany wanted it to be cleared, he sent wilson there and he found NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION nor did he find any sales of uranium
Read for yourself this is in his words.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...54C0A9659C8B63
This is not some liberal that they sent out it was Rumsfelds hand picked man that went out there to search to find if this threat was real... so dont use that arguement that this is just a left wing person...
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by Veeraj87
http:///forum/post/2535798
u cant judge something until you have seen and heard all the facts, the war in Afghanistan i support whole heartedly but i do not believe we went into Iraq correctly and i am entitled to this view, post 9-11 was supposed to be focused on al-queda this administration has done a great job of trying to draw those connections to iraq there is no doubt in my mind that saddam was a bad man and deserved to be removed, our methods of comencing those attacks were wrong, and can be viewed in this documentary view it, please, reserve judgement until you watch it, fox news does not give this side of the story i can promise u that. they even address how powell was forced to resign... sad that this is what rumsfeld and DICKC. did... they skewed the views of americans and its just terrible that we dont get to see the other side... so i am giving asking you to view it ... you will see powell makign statements, you will see the documents, you will see rumsfeld in action, and most importantly you will see CIA leaders telling you that this was wrong in going to war, we didnt have evidence, we violated the genieva convention because we didnt believe it applied today, Powell asked the president to use the UN but DICKC forced him to believe that there was an eminent threat and that we should attack at once, this is a BS war, i am not sayin i do not support the soldier who fight for the country i am sayin do not support the administrations methods for putting our brave men out there like this, this is wrong to them their families and to the people of america who stand by certian principles, we had no plan as to how we would implement a government this is all under progress now, Rumsfeld on numerous occasions said that it would be fast and simple we would not need many troops although military generals told the congress and public in several RECORDED hearings that it would take SEVERAL HUNDREDS of thousands of troops, (est. 400000) this administration lied, and they need and deserve to take the heat for an unjust war ... so say what you want but watch it see teh facts, see the people YOU BELIEVE saying and doing wrong... its UNJUST! and this is wrong as an AMERICAN i stand by principles..... this administration is not abiding to the principles we stand for PERIOD.
You are certainly entitled to your views...
What you are not entitled to is to post things like "Bush's War" and the war in Iraq is "unjust" without expecting to be questioned on it.
Post 9-11 was not "supposed to be focused on 9-11". It was a War on Terror
. It has been proven numerous times Saddam sponsored international terrorist groups including Hezbollah and Hamas.
It's funny that the CIA is now saying we didn't have the evidence. Where were these "experts" when Clinton bombed Iraq's "Chemical, nuclear, and biological" facilities in 98? How do the experts explain EVERY MAJOR nations' intel agencies (Russia, China, Britain, Israel, France, Germany, etc.) saying they too had evidence of WMD's in Iraq?
I don't know what America you stand for. I stand for an America that backs her soldiers. Saddam targetted and fired, literally, hundreds of times at American and allied pilots enforcing the No Fly Zone. Saddam violated 17 UN Resolutions, as well as his treaty he signed with us post Desert Storm. The America I stand for doesn't let a 2 bit sadistic dictator fire at our soldiers or break a treaty with us...
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veeraj87
http:///forum/post/2535870
...
This is not some liberal that they sent out it was Rumsfelds hand picked man that went out there to search to find if this threat was real... so dont use that arguement that this is just a left wing person...
Umm, you really might want to research this a bit more.... in fact a LOT more... I'll give ya a starting point "Valerie Plame".
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Thanks for the links, btw. I do find it curious, however, that you don't post any links regarding any of the following:
*Oil for Food Scandal
*Iraq barring inspectors
*Saddam funneling money from the "starving children" to build more palaces
*Torture rooms
*R ape rooms
*Secret police and exocutions of political dissidents
Etc...
 

suzy

Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2535885
You are certainly entitled to your views...
I don't know what America you stand for. .
I do not see how these two statements can be in the same post. You say the poster is entitled to their views, but if then you question the patriotism of the OP.
We all stand for the same America, there is only one, right?
 

suzy

Member
Veeera, I saw this documentary. It is chilling. I had read all these things before but I think the way it put them all together was very revealing.
About Plamegate, I really think the wingers would freak if it had been a Democrat administration that outed a CIA agent. That should have been tried as a the treason act is was. But, they did have friends in high places.....
 

reefraff

Active Member
Suzy, you can keep repeating the same tired old lies about "plamegate" but it doesn't change the proven facts in the case.
Wilson lied about his trip from who recomended him to go to what the information he gathered led the analysts to believe.
Richard Amitage (who argued against the war) was the source of the Novak leak, not Bush, Cheney or any of the Pro War "Neocons".
 
Top