Quote:

---

what "international law" did the united states violate by invading iraq?

as far as the war being illegal, why? what specific treaty or agreement did it violate?

---

Quote:

---

could you try to show a little more honesty? 

---

Quote:

---

The Top 19 Dumbest Statements of the Past Week
by Harry Browne
April 20, 2004

Politicians are a continual source of empty rhetoric, rosy promises that
are never fulfilled, meaningless mom-and-apple-pie clich?s, and outright
lies.

Last week was a particularly fertile one for such inanities. Here are
the week's 19 dumbest political statements. At the end of the list, I'll
tell you who said them.

19. "Iraq will either be a peaceful, democratic country, or it will
again be a source of violence, a haven for terror, and a threat to
America and to the world."

Right now Iraq is "a source of violence" and certainly "a haven for
terror." Or are all those bloody scenes we see on television just reruns
from Miami Vice? And, of course, Iraq was never a threat to the America.

18. "Our nation honors the memory of those who have been killed, and we
pray that their families will find God's comfort in the midst of their
grief. . . . we will finish the work of the fallen."

In other words, Americans will continue to die as a tribute to those who
have already died.

17. "We seek an independent, free and secure Iraq."

. . . Independent and free so long as it conforms to the conditions the
U.S. government has laid down.

Liberation

16. "We are a liberating power, as nations in Europe and Asia can
attest."

Don't forget the liberated Haitians, on whom we forced Aristide. And the
liberated Iranians, on whom we forced the Shah. And the Philippines, on
whom we forced Marcos. And the Dominican Republic, on whom we forced the
Trujillos. And Indonesia, where the U.S. government helped Suharto
liberate tens of thousands of East Timorese from the burden of living.

And what about those liberated Iraqis ? carrying identity cards, going
through road blocks and checkpoints, liberated from freedom of the press
and freedom of assembly, occupied by a foreign power, their towns ringed
by barbed wire, subject to raids and attacks without warrants by the
U.S. military, liberated from the right to carry a gun and defend
oneself against murderers and rapists?

15. "The nation of Iraq is moving toward self-rule . . . We're working
closely with the United Nations envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, and with Iraqis
to determine the exact form of the government that will receive
sovereignty on June 30th."

I'm sorry I must have misunderstood. I thought "self-rule" meant that
people determined their own form of government ? not a government
determined by the U.S. government or the United Nations. This sounds
more like the "self-rule" the Soviet Union gave to Poland,
Czechoslovakia, and Hungary at the end of World War II.

14. "Iraqi's neighbors also have responsibilities to make their region
more stable."

And they will shortly receive the appropriate ultimatums to inform them
of their responsibilities.

13. "Over the last several decades, we've seen that any concession or
retreat on our part will only embolden this enemy and invite more
bloodshed."

I haven't seen any concessions or retreats by the U.S. government. What
I have seen are invasions of Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, and Iraq;
U.S. troops stationed at over 700 foreign bases; ultimatums to foreign
countries to do what American Presidents demand; resources confiscated
from American taxpayers and given to brutal foreign dictators to oppress
their subjects. I've yet to see any concessions or retreats, but I have
seen a lot of innocent people die.

12. "We serve the cause of liberty, and that is, always and everywhere,
a cause worth serving."

Speaking of liberty, have you been in an American airport lately?

Changing the World

11. "We're changing the world. And the world will be better off. . . .
there's an historic opportunity here to change the world."

Which clause of the Constitution discusses the U.S. government's
responsibility to change the world?

10. "[President Bush] went to the U.N., as you might recall, and said,
either you take care of him, or we will. Any time an American President
says, if you don't, we will, we better be prepared to. . . . And the
credibility of the United States is incredibly important for keeping
world peace and freedom."

In other words, the President can make any stupid threat he wants, and
all Americans are obligated to back up that threat with their money and
their lives. That, I guess, is how "we serve the cause of liberty."

9. "The United Nations passed a Security Council resolution
unanimously that said, disarm or face serious consequences. And
[Hussein] refused to disarm."

The fact that Hussein had nothing to disarm apparently is irrelevant. He
should have hurried over to the nearest 7-Eleven, bought some WMDs, and
then disarmed.

8. "[Hussein] had long-range missiles that were undeclared to the
United Nations; he was a danger."

Yes, those "long-range" missiles could travel 111 miles ? 18 miles over
the allowable limit set by the UN. Think of the devastation they could
have wreaked on New York City!

7. "The oil revenues are ? they're bigger than we thought they would
be at this point in time. I mean, one year after the liberation of Iraq,
the revenues of the oil stream is [sic] pretty darn significant."

But we were promised that the Iraqi oil revenues would pay for most of
the reconstruction. Instead, we're paying hundreds of billions of
dollars to reconstruct in Iraq what the U.S. military destroyed.

The Monster

6. "[The Iraqis are] really pleased we got rid of Saddam Hussein. And
you can understand why. This is a guy who was a torturer, a killer, a
maimer; there's mass graves."

Ah yes, the mass graves. No one ever explains who is in those mass
graves or how they came about. Do they contain Iraqis who died during
U.S. bombings? Or Iraqis and Iranians who died in the Iraq-Iran war? Or
the Iraqi soldiers who were plowed under with U.S. bulldozers at the end
of the Gulf War? No one seems to know. But all anyone has to do is
mention the "mass graves" ? and we know immediately that no amount of
money, no loss of American lives, no cost of any kind is too great for
having rid the world of the man who created those "mass graves."

And speaking of torture, I seem to recall conservative commentators
telling us not too long ago that American agents should be permitted to
torture suspected terrorists. But I guess that's different somehow.

5. "The world is better off without Saddam Hussein."

Tell that to the 700 Americans and thousands of Iraqis who have died in
the American invasion of Iraq. Tell that to the 200 Spaniards who died
in a terrorist attack triggered by the Spanish government's support of
the American invasion of Iraq. These people are dead! How are they
better off?

And tell it to the Iraqis who now live in daily fear of being killed by
a stray shell from a U.S. tank or from the rifle of a U.S. soldier who
barks orders in English that an Iraqi can't understand and obey. "The
world is better off" is one of those empty clich?s that require no
explanation, no examination, no support. But isn't it about time we did
examine it?

Who's in Charge Here?

4. "[President Bush is] the ultimate decision-maker for this country."

Then the politicians are right: the world really is a dangerous place.

3. "Sometimes we use military as a last resort, but other times we use
our influence, diplomatic pressure."

"Diplomacy" by the U.S. government consists of telling other countries
"You're either for us or against us; now here's what you must do or
we'll flatten your country."

"Influence" means using taxpayer money to bribe foreign leaders to join
the "Coalition of the Willing."

2. "Free societies are peaceful societies."

If that's true, America obviously is not a free society. We have been at
war continually since 1941, and the American military has been involved
in some kind of foreign conflict in 80 of the past 100 years. A
"peaceful society" doesn't invade Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, or Iraq.
So, if it's true that "free societies are peaceful societies," America
obviously isn't a free society.

The Wellspring of Wisdom

So who said all these dumb statements?

Every one of them was made by George Bush ? "the ultimate decision-maker
for this country" ? at his press conference last Tuesday, April 13.

And here is the #1 dumbest political statement of the week ? straight
from that same press conference . . .

1. "As the greatest power on the face of the Earth, we have an
obligation to help the spread of freedom. We have an obligation to help
feed the hungry . . . we're providing food for the North Korea people
who starve. We have an obligation to lead the fight on AIDS, on Africa.
And we have an obligation to work toward a more free world. That's our
obligation. That is what we have been called to do."

So this is what it means to live in a "free society." We have
obligations to virtually everyone in the world ? to help the spread of
freedom, to fight AIDS, to provide food to North Korea. Not to take care
of our own lives, not to be free to keep the money we earn or make our
own decisions ? but instead to dutifully carry out obligations imposed
on us by our government.

I don't know about you, but I don't believe George Bush has the faintest
idea what freedom means. The only thing he understands is power ? the
power to say anything he feels like without consequence, the power to
lock people up and throw away the key, the power to impose his will on
any country in the world, the power to define our obligations for us.

When will we be liberated?

http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/dumbeststatements.htm

---

Quote:

---

Posted by mushmaster:

exactly what cease-fire terms did the iraqis violate?? no banned weapons have been found in iraq.. nor is there any other evidence that such a violation occurred...

July 1994 - Iraq destroys 480,000 liters of chemical agents in accordance to demands of the UNSCOM. (Oldaker 1996, 2)

14 June 1996 - UNSCOM inspectors begin dismantling a biological weapons facility in central Iraq, despite pleas from Baghdad to salvage some dual-use items. (Reuters, 14 June 1996)

End October 1997 - Iraq refuses entry to three Americans on a team of UN arms inspectors, and warns Iraqi anti-aircraft guns might fire upon US U-2 spy planes if surveillance flights continue. The UN sends a high-level diplomatic mission to resolve the budding crisis and Iraq delays the expulsion order against the American inspectors. (Washington Post, 3 November 1997, A1; Financial Times, 5 November 1997, 6)

12 November 1997 - The UN Security Council unanimously approves a travel ban for senior Iraqi officials and demands that Iraq stop interfering with UN weapons inspectors. Iraq insists that the weapons teams have fewer Americans. When Iraq refuses to comply with UN demands, the weapons inspectors leave the country. Fears mount that Iraq could revive chemical and biological weapons programs without the oversight of the international community. Russia and France push for a diplomatic solution to the crisis, while Washington does not rule out a resort to the use of force. The United States increases its military presence in the Gulf. (Washington Post, 13 November 1997, A1; Washington Post, 18 November 1997, A22)

21 November 1997 - After intense diplomacy by Security Council members, particularly Russia, Iraq agrees to allow UN weapon inspectors back into the country. Russia agrees to push for concessions, such as the easing of the UN sanctions, in return. The Security Council rebuffs a Russian request to declare Iraq free of nuclear weapons and nearly free of prohibited missiles. (Washington Post, 21 November 1997, A1; New York Times, 22 November 1997, A1)

16 January 1998 - A weapons inspection team leaves Iraq after being barred for three days from conducting an inspection. The UN Security Council deplores Iraq's decision, which constitutes a clear violation of UN resolutions. (CRS, 6 March 1998, 3)

17 January 1998 - Saddam Hussein announces that Iraq will expel all weapons inspectors if sanctions against Iraq are not removed within six months. (CRS, 6 March 1998, 3)

3 February 1998 - US Secretary of Defense Cohen warns that if diplomacy fails, the United States will wage a "significant" military campaign against Iraq, "far more than what has been experienced in the past." (CRS, 6 March 1998, 5)

29 April 1998 - UNSCOM chief arms inspector Richard Butler reveals that experts discovered mustard gas in Iraqi artillery shells found at an ammunitions depot in 1996. The discovery raises new questions about similar shells that remain unaccounted for. (New York Times, 29 April 1998, A10)

24 June 1998 - Contradicting claims it never weaponized the substance, UNSCOM chief Butler says tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland show Iraq loaded deadly VX gas onto a missile. Iraq claims bias in the test of warhead pieces; similar weapons fragments are tested in Switzerland and France to see whether the finding can be confirmed. (USIS, 24 June 1998; New York Times, 25 June 1998, A10)

23 July 1998 - Iraqi authorities refuse to give UNSCOM documents that list weapons used by the Iraqi Air Force during the war with Iran. (Washington Post, 24 July 1998, A28)

5 August 1998 - Iraq restricts activities of IAEA and orders an end to all UNSCOM inspections, except for those specifically approved by the Iraqi government. It allows long distance monitoring with video camera, as well as air, water and soil sampling, to continue. President Hussein demands that UNSCOM be restructured, Butler replaced, and that UNSCOM move its headquarters out of the United States. (Financial Times, 6 August 1998, 1; USIS, 6 August 1998; New York Times, 15 September 1998, A3; Wall Street Journal, 2 October 1998, A16)

3 September 1998 - In a letter to Congress, President Clinton denounces Iraq's failure to allow weapons inspections, warns that, "If the Council fails to persuade the Iraqi regime to resume cooperation, all other options are on the table ." (USIS, 3 September 1998)

14 September 1998 - Iraq's National Assembly threatens to end all cooperation with inspectors unless the Security Council resumes regular reviews of the sanctions. (New York Times, 15 September 1998, A3)

31 October 1998 - Iraq stops all cooperation with weapons inspectors, banning arms inspectors from visiting sites that have already been inspected and were being monitored by UNSCOM. Baghdad says sensors and monitors placed in sites can continued operating and also exempt the IAEA from its latest decision. (Financial Times, 2 November 1998, 1; Wall Street Journal, 2 November 1998, A4)

20 November 1998 - Shortly after UNSCOM inspectors resume their duties in Iraq, the Iraqi government refuses to provide 12 documents relating to weapons inventories. Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Riyadh al-Qaysi accuses the inspectors of "unjustifiably" prolonging their work, thereby extending the embargo. (Washington Post, 24 November 1998, A25; 18 November 1998, A33; Financial Times, 24 November 1998, 6)

19 December 1998 - After four consecutive nights of bombing, the US and Britain end the attack on Iraq. President Clinton declares Operation Desert Fox a success at degrading Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program and his conventional military capacity. In all, there were about 600 bombs and 415 cruise missiles fired at approximately 100 targets. (Washington Post, 20 December 1998, A1; New York Times, 20 December 1998, 24; Wall Street Journal, 21 December 1998, A3; 22 December 1998, A20)

15 December 1999 - Iraq refuses to allow IAEA inspectors to check Iraq's uranium stockpile as required under the 1968 nuclear nonproliferation treaty. (New York Times, 15 December 1999, A13; 16 December 1999, A5)

19 December 1999 - Iraq officially rejects resolution 1284 and demands unconditional lifting of sanctions. (Washington Post, 19 December 1999, A54)

(emphasis mine)

complete timeline here.

---