Is war in Iraq immoral and illegal?

Question

Article 51 of International Law argues against preemptive strike.

Since we all know now the false inteliigence, and all the other actions taken that led us into a war on IRAQ, anyon can see there was no WMDs that would constitute a preemptive strike.
And talks of a preemptive strike against Iran are the same -- since there is no direct evidence that Iran poses a threat to U.S.

So, should Bush stand trial for violating International Law, and being responsible for the deaths of 4000 americans, 30000 wounded and hundreds of thousands of iraqis dead, wounmded and left homeless?

PFO -- Im with you on that one.
The reports were there for all them to see how limited the intel was..and yet they still voted for it.

A few smart dems were able to see past the B.S.
Every person who voted for and continues to support this has been playing politics with american soldiers lives at stake.
I say replace them all...and investigate and punish all those guilty..REPUB, DEM alike

So lets get this straihgt because SFC is a soldier, hes an authority..and he can say...International Law is wrong, and all the Facts we have about WMD's in Iraq and the investigations....are wrong because he wants to supportbush--and not The Constitution.
great arguement

Unbelievable.
the U.S. is above international law.
and people believe this

funny is people still singing chenneys wmd Iraq still has them tunes

Answer 1

I dont give a rats @ss about International Law. Why is the US the only country expected to abide by international law? GWB, in going into Iraq, was attempting to enforce UN directives to Saddam - yet it is all the fault of the US. Why is this acceptable to Americans?

Do you remeber that the UN voted that we could go into Iraq if Saddam did not comply? Well, he called their bluff because he knew they would fold and Bush was the only one that had the guts to hold them to it. What short memories people have!

Why dont you tell the dead Kurds that there were no WMDs. I am sure that will give them some comfort.

Brainy....so you now admit he had WMDs?.......thankyou!
Exactly which WMDs do you claim the US supplied to him? I think we have had this argument before on one of your questions, and you did not like my answer so you reported me. Nice.

Answer 2

The 3 open pursuits had been to uncover WMDs, kill or seize Saddam and to set up democracy in Iraq. Now did they uncover WMDs ? There are studies that propose that US used to be entirely realizing earlier than aggression that there have been no proof of any form of WMDs KILL SADDAM........ Yes .... undertaking completed. Democracy in Iraq ? While People being killed day-to-day and nation in a multitude, the inspiration of democracy has a faraway hazard to take a form. Therefore this function may be no longer possible. With such a lot of conspiracies to the credit score of CIA, it's not very implausible that the truly pursuits of the conflict had been unique from what had been propagated through the US. Now luckily individuals like Lt Ehren are popping out to talk the reality. Remember you can not hold fact a hostage. One day it's certain to return out. One day....... Till then we will be able to wait just for the courageous individuals like Lt. Ehren Watada to talk out in opposition to their ERRING LEADERSHIP. ..................

Answer 3

of course the war in Iraq is immoral and illegal.bush as well as all the others involved should stand trail for their war crimes.why should we continue in this course when it;s against the international law.and there is proof that we had no business invading the country of Iraq.other then to take down Saddam.but then we should of pulled out and came back home.this country is a disgrace to the rest of the world.bush should be brought down just like Saddam was brought down.he;s killing our young men and women in uniform for no damn good reason. other then to show the world that we can break internationl law and get away with it.

Answer 4

If Bush stands trial, then throw all the congressmen and women who voted to approve the war up their with him. Let's put our whole government on trial for making a mistake with bad intelligence, and then having the courage to release a report stating the truth that no WMDs were found in Iraq. Had they not come forward and told the truth, your entire question would have no justification, you wouldn't even be considering it.

International law, and all laws in general are only as good as those that follow them. When someone violates international law, who goes after them? The UN? So the UN should come after us? Well, did Al Qaeda violate international law on 9/11? If we did, then clearly they did. Who goes after them? Not the UN, we do.

Answer 5

1)If Iraq NEVER had WMD, what killed the Kurds when Saddam dropped nerve gas on them?

2) Why didn't the UN go after Saddam in 1991 and prosecute him for war crimes then and there when we had 750,000 troops 100 miles outside of Baghdad?

3) How long do we allow a dictator to rape, murder, and abuse his own people before taking action? Isn't that violating someone's law?

I never did care if they found any WMD's. Saddam deserved to be taken out and his people liberated. Too bad others can't see that.

Answer 6

The US is the only nation that has ever enforced any decent form of "international law." The thought of liberal (international definition as compared to realism) approach to foreign policy has failed. The UN is the only international agency that has been set up to "police" the world. It is a broken system and has no will to act to do anything to stop atrocities. If anyone should stand trial Kofi Annan and Bill Clinton should as well. They sat on their hands knowing that genocides were going on in places like Rwanda and Sierra Leon.

Answer 7

One might argue that the current operations in Iraq are simply a continuation of the Gulf War.

Sanctions were imposed, UN resolutions decalred, continued conflict' in the no fly zones, the attacks on the Kurds,

Hmm seems like one could just argue 'U.S. is just finishing up the first operation'

Try looking 20-30 years down the road. You might start to see the goals in the region.

Answer 8

Does anyone remember back to the day, when the United States stood up to 4000 nuclear missiles aimed at us from the Soviets? That seems so long ago. Why are we so afraid of third world countries with no air force? But, to answer your question, hell no! Bush should not go on trial for his actions anymore than Truman or Kennedy should have. Truman started us down this path by taking us to Korea without Congress declaring war. We need a president who who will put Congress back into power when it comes to wars. We need to realize that the Costitution works and we need to use all of it. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand that.

Answer 9

You ask a question. Then portray your own opinions as facts.

You spelled "wounded" wrong on the last line there...right before the homeless statement. Which, btw, is just assinine in and of itself.

You can agree with the war, disagree with it, don't care about it, whatever you want. But at the very least, get some real information instead of making up your own, such as that "homeless Iraqi's" statement...

Answer 10

Here we go again with the illegal war.

Under whose law is it illegal, the UN who refuses to back up anything they say?

Or are you still just sore because you couldn't make E4.

The president is not a war criminal. You claim to be so smart go back in history and read about all the people all over the world who just knew Saddam was making WMD

Even read the 11,000 page report from the Iraq study Group, Look at all the programs that Saddam had hidden, just waiting to start again.

Please, you claim to be this super American then start acting like it.