This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Architects of Iraq War ADMIT It Was Illegal
The chief American prosecutor for the Nuremberg war crime trials – Robert H. Jackson – stated:
To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.
Forget third-hand allegations … the architects of the Iraq war admit that they initiated a war of aggression, not a war to defend America from imminent attack.
Influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded in 2003 that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal:
“International law … would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone“, and this would have been morally unacceptable.
Indeed, U.S. government officials have admitted that everyone knew that Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction.
A top Bush administration adviser – Philip Zelikow said that the Iraq war was launched to protect Israel.
And the following Bush officials admitted that the Iraq war was launched for oil:
- George W. Bush
- Key war architect – and Under Secretary of State – John Bolton
- Former Bush speechwriter David Frum (referring to Dick Cheney)
- A high-level National Security Council officer
- 4 Star General John Abizaid, the former commander of CENTCOM, with responsibility for Iraq
- Many others
Of course, this is "old news" (#15) ... except that the U.S. did the same thing in Libya, and is now doing the same thing in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere.
»
- advertisements -
I think "It was for oil" is a lie. It was to preserve the petro-dollar when said 'bad men' threatened to start accepting other payments for oil. Getting their oil and gold was icing.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned". The Shepherd, Firefly
Most likely there were multiple reasons and stakeholders with much overlapping.
- Saddam threatening thev petrodollar
- Cheney's oil buddies getting plum deals on reconstructing the Iraqi oil industry
- A state hostile to Israel dismembered and neutralized
Very true.
But you can't tell the world and your citizens that Saddam selling oil for Euros will blow up the Ponzi scheme of the Petro-dollar scam. Instead we got a steady diet of :
"Look he's killed Iranians."(not that we minded. We sold him the weapons.)
"Look, he killed Kuwaitis." (after we gave him the green light)
"Look, he's killing Kurds." (with gas we gave him for Iran)
"Look, he violates the no-fly zones. (Yup, he flew his planes over his own country)
"Look, he's got WMD's." (We know that's bullshit but we can sell it.)
"Let's Roll."
And 100X more people end up dead than Saddam ever murdered.
On top of it all, we leave the oil in the ground...How fucking stupid is that?
Mission Accomplished.
If you're going Viking, the whole point of the exercise is to be cost effective and make a few bucks for your trouble, not to spend a trillion bucks to hide a secret nobody gives a shit about.
Just tell 'em your going to get cheap gas for their Suburban. Congress can get re-elected on that alone.
meaning....it was still about oil
Well...Technically it was about the economy as ALL WARS ARE ABOUT ECONOMIC ISSUES.
We do not want to lose Dollar Hegemony. Hussein was going to take Euros which would have severely weakened our World Reserve Currency status.
And just why do you think that Russia and China are on the list?
Do not fool yourself. If they continue to attack the Dollar hegemony then we will throw nukes at them.
These bastards believe in acceptable domestic civilian losses They do not care about you. They never have.
They are not in it for the money. Hell they can have that printed, in ever increasing quantities, at will.
They are insatiably power hungry. That is what they are after. Total control and you are just a pawn it their game.
Ukraine is just the excuse.
You, sir, are NOT a conservative.
Neither are you, sir!
With grades like this (wish I could see the current POTUS info), I posit this, would anyone have a surgeon with grades like these to operate on you, let alone work on your car or espouse science (Global Warming)? Not only was Gruber right about voters, but the universities who taught these idiots need to be held to account.
http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html
Cui bono? Bolton is only a servant. Who got the oil? Or rather, who benefited when the oil was not available? Bolton mentioned Iran as the enemy. If they wanted the oil, why did they not take it? Cui bono from the war, if taking the oil was not the objective?
Are there morals in war? Is there a good war, where evil and self interest lose? This is a fantasy of sheeple, that a good king is in charge. War obtains more power and fools sheeple into aiding their masters' quest.
"Things are not what they seem; skim milk masquerades as cream" ~Gilbert & Sullivan. War is not righteousness, but about empowering a stronger evil.
war pigs kill, architects design to build.
there are no architects of war.
technocrats and engineers, two
more terms to look up.
there is a global battle at play where
two diverging serpents are in conflict
over which of them will claim the meat
on the bones of the many. screw em' both
i say. i don't like them or enjoy their
company or propaganda, their perverted
perspectives, views or anything else they
try to shove down the media or cultural
pipe lines.
they are disgusting examples of failed
consciousness in this day and age. they are
the unthinking, unwashed and supremely ignorant
fools set on murder and environmental consumption
to the point of collapse and destruction.
unconscious, industrial age cannibals with the
blinding hunger.
screw em', war criminals. we know this and
we just can't forget it.
.
yes, power knows no law to restrict its ambitions,
it makes the laws that further them in grand insolence.
When American pundits or politicians wonder aloud "why they hate us so much"...
Now take your country Argentina as an example, it's run by a bunch of socialist misfits that can't form a stable economy if their life depended on it. 60 years later and the politicos are still blaming it on some mysterious force holding them down. Chile your neighbor, blows circles around your economy while you guys are still pointing fingers and not taking responsibility.
Mysterious?
Well ... there's this.
Yes mysterious, like some unmarked link to a child porn site. I'll never change your mind GW, liberalism truly is a mental disorder.
No it's not mysterious. The US constantly intervenes in these countries economics and politics. Argentina was completely set up by the US. Venezuala, Brazil, Equador, etc, etc, etc. And now they are setting up Cuba by playing nice.
Here's a clue. All those countries have one thing in common...socialism. The Neo-liberal Imperialists hate the competition from socialist countries so they stifle their economies. Notice we only cozied up to Cuba after China started flirting with them.
Watch confessions of and economic hitman and visit globalresearch.ca once in awhile to gain some perspective that is a little higher than 50ft in the air.
PS. Michael Savage sold out several years ago so you can stop parroting his "liberalism is a mental disorder".
regarding the determination "mental disorder",
if we live long enough and the psychiatry ambitions
have their way, all human impulses and behaviors,
all thought and thinking, will be categorized and
determined to be "dis-orders". it is all about order
with the authority of the in crowd consensus by
natural and simplistic definition, a priori and
all.
order is a mere observation. dead seeking to make
life of the dead observation.
http://www.naturalnews.com/038322_DSM-5_psychiatry_false_diagnosis.html
order is not alive or of life.
it is of a static framework resulting
in an observation, a dead concept, depiction and picture.
out of time.
an out of time frozen illusion that is "in
order". all dis-orders represent, not disease,
but potential ease, truth and fluidity.
real life. no? notice the geniuses need to die
and be buried for a while before they are resurrected.
so it goes.
what makes me crazy is that them who know do not say
while them who do not know have unlimited air time.
.
speak up damn it!
.
mama tried .....
Merle Haggard - "Mama Tried"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luUK-b6X0ik
.
anyway poems ...
"if we live long enough and the psychiatry ambitions have their way, all human impulses and behaviors, all thought and thinking, will be categorized and determined to be "dis-orders".
Great observation. And this then gives the green light for even more control of the serfs. Look at how today we see what's just normal boyish behaviour in schools classified as a disorder with the unfortunate kid prescribed Ritalin or some other soporific.
As always folks go back to the excretions of the Frankfurt School and their adherents. The program for Western societal destruction is there in black and white.
Nice number 1!
Oh, and ...
It's cause of our freedoms...
Naomi Klein Retweeted Tony Blair to Resign
Warmonger to resign from farcical role.
Tony Blair to resign as Middle East peace envoy http://htz.li/1WE ”
Now he will become the East Ukraine peace envoy. His spice will still flow.
To protect Isreal...prolly. For Oil? BS. This argurment is undermined by the nasty little fact that we didn't get any oil...when Iraq had a chance to "payback" the US, they chose a French company for their contracts. Not a fan of the war or the retoric on either side.
Still trying to come to "grips" with the concept that the government could do something illegal...shocking I tell you, shocking!
The answer is multi-faceted. Cheney said the war was not to capture the oil but to ensure that Iraq continued supplying oil to the market, (10-20% of the market). Because "The american way of life is non-negotiable".
Bush said the purpose was divide and conquer. Sow seeds of chaos in the region and pit sunni against shia. Then draw new borders. Which lines up with ZB's Grand Chessboard theory and the PNAC, both of which were born from the paranoia of countries in the middle east unionizing and rising up against the west. They, and their oil, would be too formidable of an enemy, economically.
Divide, Conquer. Art of War 101.
You know, that is one thing I always had a problem with as well. However, events of recent days have maybe opened up a window to view it all from a different perspective. Consider that France is NATO and all of that. Would it not be good cover to not get the oil directly but allow an ally to take it instead? As long as the profit ultimately ends up in our pockets, who cares?
I have no evidence to show this is the case, just positing a theory.
about the oil means dollar hegemony / petro dollar. not getting cheap oil directly from Iraq.
If the US dollar lost it's ability to print with almost impunity then you would see that it really was about 'cheap oil'
Was the Iraq War About Grabbing Oil … Or Keeping It Off the Market?
Your stories change faster than the "facts" about ferguson.
First it was to secure and steal cheap Iraqi oil.
Now you seem to propose that it was to make oil unavailable and high cost.
Was there a change in medication prescriptions?
There's only one important question, sir: Was the Iraq war launched to protect America's national security against an imminent attack?
Um, no ...
"There's only one important question, sir: Was the Iraq war launched to protect America's national security against an imminent attack?"
Here's a little bit of remedial help with that question.
PM Sharon: Iraq Is Our Biggest Threat
First Publish: 8/13/2002, 10:14 AM
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/28320
Um, yes.
Bill Clinton claimed that Hussein had the WMD,
John Kerry claimed that Iraq had the WMD.
Hilllary Clinton claimed that Iraq had the WMD.
Saddam Hussein thought he had WMD.
ISIS In Iraq Find Saddam Hussein’s WMD Stockpiles Of Chemical Weapons… George W Bush Was Right
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-in-iraq-find-saddam-husseins-wmd-stockpiles-of-chemical-weapons-george-w-bush-was-right/#xsfQ6A1bGR620ekQ.99
then
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0
Only a few nutters, including YOU, would wait until after an enemy has declared war on the US and actually destroyed a part of our country, before eliminating the threat. Be advised: If a country has announced that it plans to destroy another country, BOTH countries are at war.
"...Bill Clinton claimed that Hussein had the WMD..."
and he was right - in 1991. In fact, Iraq agreed to allow UNSCOM in to supervise the destruction of chemical weapons at the al Muthanna complex from 1992-1994. Since the Desert Fox bombing campaign heavily damaged two bunkers of stockpiled CWs, UNSCOM figured it was too dangerous to dig them out to destroy them. UNSCOM elected to seal the bunkers with concrete making them unusable and impossible to recover safely. Iraq, itself, was responsible for destroying all the production equipment at that complex - to be verified by UNSCOM inspections as the work progressed. Those inspections were halted in 1998 when the U.S. warned UN inspectors to leave the country (because they were going to bomb it).
"...ISIS In Iraq Find Saddam Hussein’s WMD Stockpiles Of Chemical Weapons…"
No they didn't. ISIS found the al Muthanna Complex. UNSCOM had long since destroyed all the CWs there - the CIA agrees. The only conceivable 'stockpiles' were the two bunkers with twenty-year-old CWs encased in 40 feet of concrete. They were encased under UNSCOM's supervision and deemed unrecoverable. All the rest of the junk at al Muthanna were remains of the disassembled production lines or empty CW canisters that UNSCOM destroyed. There was nothing for ISIS to find unless they wanted to jackhammer through 40 ft. of concrete for the useless/degraded CWs encased within. Iraq did not fully complete the destruction of CW production equipment, but that's because they were interrupted by the U.S. bombing them again. Nothing was usable.
"...George W Bush Was Right..."
No he wasn't. Bush insisted that active PRODUCTION facilities and programs existed in Iraq as well as usable stockpiles. The CIA report from 2007 clearly states that this was not the case. There were leftovers and junk from the old program. There was no active CW, biological or nuclear weapons programs in Iraq according to the CIA.
You're resorting to the expected Hasbara twist of distorting the actual threat as described by the U.S. - production and useable stockpiles, i.e., an ACTIVE WMD program. The U.S. never described the WMD threat as every last drop of CWs ever produced and abandoned by Iraq. There was no global threat from twenty-year-old leaky 155mm shells buried in the desert. Those had to be destroyed per the U.N. mandate, but that's absolutely NOT why the U.S. bombed or invaded them. Bush, Cheney and the other psychopaths were clearly referring to the treat of ACTIVE WMD programs which was a total lie.
Everything the coalition forces stumbled across were UNUSABLE leftovers abandoned or buried before 1991. The biggest 'stockpile' was a bunch of obviously junk Grad rockets sitting in an Iraqi munitions junkyard or tons of buried 155 mm shells. The Iraqis didn't want to move them because they were unstable, and they didn't want to blow them up because that would release whatever agents were still inside the shells. Which, of course, the U.S. did exposing many Iraqis and U.S. soldiers to massive clouds of chemical agents. If the U.S. didn't pull UNSCOM to bomb Iraq, the shells and rockets would have eventually been identified and handled correctly. UNSCOM itself said they were not done destroying every CW left in Iraq, but they did say there was nothing usable in 1998. They were concentrating on bulk CW agents, the production facilities and USABLE munitions first. They didn't worry about old, leaky unusable munitions that Iraq discarded in the desert prior to the 1990 program.
"...Only a few nutters, including YOU, would wait until after an enemy has declared war on the US and actually destroyed a part of our country, before eliminating the threat..."
There was NEVER a threat to the U.S. The CIA report states pretty clearly that Hussein ramped up his CW program in 1990 to RESPOND to a potential Israeli nuclear attack. The Iraqis were not at war with anyone at the time, just like Syria. They were using them as a deterrent against Israeli aggression because that's all they had. Israel had stolen all those W-54 nuclear pits from the U.S. and had repeatedly threatened Syria and Iraq. And Iraq NEVER threatened to use CWs on the U.S. In fact, that's where they got the CWs, supplies and know-how to use them on the Iranians... with U.S. assistance and intelligence.
"...Be advised: If a country has announced that it plans to destroy another country, BOTH countries are at war..."
Israel has repeatedly threatened to destroy Syria, Iraq and now Iran preemptively out of paranoia. No other country in the Middle East is allowed to have an army or any weapons if Israel doesn't like them. Syria, Iraq and Iran have all threatened to retaliate if attacked by Israel, but never threatened to attack and destroy Israel. Fringe religious or political nut-jobs do not count as the voice of any of those countries no matter how many times Israel insists that their opinions represent the official, credible position of that government.
You're simply parroting Nettanyahu's paranoid delusions, Augustus. If Israel doesn't like any country on earth, then it must completely disarm before Israel is satisfied that it doesn't pose an existential threat to them. Israel will NEVER disarm - they've said as much over and over again. They have been and are the biggest threat to ME stability. What happens when they decide Qatar or Saudi Arabia must disarm? What if they get pissed off at the Turks? Is Egypt or Libya ever allowed to build an army or use missiles? Who made Israel the ruler of the entire Middle East?
so it's just a strange coincidence that Cheney had all those double secret energy meetings that SCOTUS kept precious that discussed peak oil and some of the last easy crude that by amazing coincidence was located in Iraq. It was also a strange coincidence that once we set up "the puppet" regime in Iraq we tried to get these folks to revert back to the fifties and grant absolute property rights to the international oil companies of the very oil they were standing on. Unfortuntely for the companies, the folks figured it out and said no thanks.
Amazing coincidence
And I'm sure Cheney knows nothing of peak oil.
Cause he's never played in the industry
Peak Oil is now confirmed nonsense. Your post is in the same category.
Increasing oil production and lowering costs sure seemed to be the goal of Bush / Cheney. Recall that it was really low oil prices that caused the stronger economy in the early Clinton years. Bush was faced with the Clintoon collapse and oil prices increasing to $140 bbl. Getting reserves unlocked on federal lands would help. Obammie still is restricting drilling on public lands.
Cheney was so close to Saudi Arabia he knew how they hated Saddam once he had boxed in Iran and feared he was too powerful for them after he took Kuwait which the Wahhabis had tried to take in 1920s
Since we're talking about Ferguson, there's another important question. Did "hands up don't sht" ever happen, or was that fabricated? Cause you were pretty sure you knew all the facts when you were writing about it.
Of course 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot" never happened. It was just more of the Geo Wash confidently reporting Bull Shit.
Another group of bullshitter professionals had a post of an apology. Not on the front page of the paper, of course, but on one of their blogs. Too bad they could not get the facts straight before they instigated Burn This Bitch Down.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/
What DOJ found made me ill. Wilson knew about the theft of the cigarillos from the convenience store and had a description of the suspects. Brown fought with the officer and tried to take his gun. And the popular hands-up storyline, which isn’t corroborated by ballistic and DNA evidence and multiple witness statements, was perpetuated by Witness 101. In fact, just about everything said to the media by Witness 101, whom we all know as Dorian Johnson, the friend with Brown that day, was not supported by the evidence and other witness statements.
Read the whole thing with the excerpts from the DOJ report.
You defame the character of the "child" Michael Brown sir! That was not him on the video accosting the small Paki-man and stealing (audible gasp!) his tobacco products! That was FBI paid actors, the video came from the cops meant to sew discord, what other proof do you need!
Seems like they would have shutup when the first autopsy came back saying all shots came from the front...and the most glaring...a hit to the top of the head blowing out his eyeball.
Almost as if...he was charging AT the one doing the shooting, like witnesses said.
Lesson #1 In Life, no matter how big you think you are, you're body mass is negated by the single fact that you have a hollow point ripping through your skull sending very conflicting signals from your brain to your legs.
Mnewn- How in the fuck did you get down voted for that? Barry and DickHolder must be trolling.
Good to see your still around.
Happy St. Patty's Day
Well, I don't know how I got down voted for that.
I guess the truth hurts ;-)
(And I have managed to pick up a few trolls along the way when I say anything...LMAO!)
AIN't THAT THE TRUTH!?!?
Governments, like corporations, like many people, do some nasty things when they think there's no way they will be held accountable.
This contradicts the "fighting for our freedom" narrative I have been taught by my god, TV, so I'm not going to listen.
i suspect it was also for the "economy" of
weapons manufacturing as that is perceived
to constitute future security if handily controlled.
but, it is not handily controlled; more like
psychologically controlled if at all and that,
at the great expense of every other potential human
gift or revelation?
the human spirit being induced into the military
and war oriented realm or paradigm.
.
"we shall overcome, someday." ....
.
patrick drove out the snakes of paganism
only to introduce a/the serpent to prostrate
the people to empiric, and "early" domination
i suspect.
.
technology is the modern serpent ........?
Do not forget unemployment. Lots of soldiers were working and contractors hiring.
"work" is a four letter word.
So why are the international courts failing to bring charges? Are they not as eligible for prosecution as Keitel, Goebbels, etc? Why does not the US Department of Justice arrest the named people and hold them pending charges from the appropriate international organizations of justice ?
So why are the international courts failing to bring charges?
because....
A. The ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
but....
B. The United States is not a participant in the International Criminal Court (ICC)
To actually charge them would mean blowing up US hegemony and that is not going to happen.
If the US is ever in the position that Germany was, expect the charges to come fast and furious.
Because international law is about as useful as nuts on a truck.
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer" - Henry Kissinger ZWO Mac Daddy