Proud To Be A Delegate - Unity08.com

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

 
Is the Iraq War Legal? A Dialogue

1. H said

> Yes. I've heard the rumor that the WMDs were moved to
> Syria. I don't happen to believe those reports.
> Considering what I know about Saddam, I have serious
> doubts he would have shipped such weapons to a
> neighboring country. As you may recall, he sent his
> Air Force (120-140 planes) to Iran during the First
> Gulf War. You may also recall that after the war he
> got back NONE of those planes. I have never been
> convinced that Saddam would let anything as valuable
> as WMDs out of his control.
>
> I would be more willing to consider those WMDs buried
> in Iraq. However, the fact that all we have found was
> some old chemical artillery shells in the entire time
> we have been in Iraq. We have captured heaps of
> records. However, we have never found much in the way
> of actual weapons. These weapons may exist, but I
> kind of doubt it.

2. Liberty or Death Said

"The invasion was a success in three weeks with few
> casualties and cost."
>
3. H said

I would actually disagree with this assessment.
> First, we got screwed on our deployment because Turkey
> would not allow us to deploy through the North end of
> Iraq. Indeed, we had to move troops quickly to the
> South and they did not have time to adequately work
> up.

4. Liberty or Death reply

The Turkey diplomatic debacle had no effect on the outcome of the military campaign. The military achieved their objective in three weeks. Army gone, Saddam gone.

5. H said

Second, we had enough troops to defeat the Iraq Army.
> However, we did not have enough troops to hold the
> ground we took. This lead to looting that was
> somewhat problematic for us. The Iraq Army troops
> taking their weapons with them while walking away from
> the war. This allowed some forward thinking guys to
> walk off with huge stores of explosives that we could
> not secure. Of course, we magnified this error by
> firing the entire Iraq Army without back pay. Nothing
> like letting all the trained soldiers in Iraq leave
> with their weapons and without their pay. I blame
> Bremmer for that little mistake.

6. Liberty or Death Reply

All true but not the military’s fault. Bremmer, Rummy, Condi, Cheney, but most of all Bush.
>
7. Liberty or Death said

"No Middle East nation is anything more than a
> collection of rival societies and tribes."
>
8. H Reply

I think you have this exactly right. We have put
> ourselves in the middle of this mess. Right now, the
> Islamic Jihadists are all concentrating on the
> occupying power (the United States of America.) When
> we leave, I fully expect them to return to their
> favorite occupation of trying to kill each other.

9. Liberty or death Reply

Don't equate the Islamic Jihadists with the tribes. Your right the tribes will go back to killing each other, especially in Iraq. The tribal leaders have no control over the Jihadists. They are the product of waco clerics and there are a lot of them and Saudi money in the billions is supporting them. They are a direct threat to the US.
>
10. H Said

A look at this map is illustrative:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Iraq_demography.jpg
>
> I expect the Kurds will hold the North. They will use
> their oil wealth to buy weapons from the Soviet Union.
> I expect the Shia will take over the South and middle
> of the country. I expect them to buy their weapons
> from the Chinese. I expect both of them will spend a
> majority of their time shooting at the Sunnis.
> Without oil or the use of the Iraq Army, I think the
> Sunnis are going to have a rough time of it. I expect
> them to be all way to busy to be planning attacks on
> the US.
>
11. Liberty or Death said

"These goals should have the same status as our
> constitution and the Declaration of Independence."
>
12. H said

Actually, why can't the goals be the basic principles
> as laid down in the Declaration of Independence?
>
> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men
> are created equal, that they are endowed by their
> Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
> these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
>
> All men created equal? Yupper. That would be a tough
> value to stand up and be counted on. If we had
> couched the Iraq War in terms of helping the Iraq
> people find their life and liberty, I might have
> supported the effort a bit more.
>
> Or perhaps some of the goals as set down in the Bill
> of Rights:
>
> "The right of the people to be secure in their
> persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
> unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
> violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon
> probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
> particularly describing the place to be searched, and
> the persons or things to be seized."

13. Liberty or Death Reply

But that is not relevant. The goals are the 2006 collective will of the American people. You can't legislate that. It is innate right of every individual to think for himself. I have just enumerated what I think the majority of Americans believe.
>
14. H said

Shouldn't this apply to those who talk on the phone?
> I don't believe the NSA asked for a warrant when they
> started searching the private conversations of
> Americans.

15. Liberty or Death Reply

Sure they did. They followed the previsions of the Patriot Act.
>

16. H Said

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy
> the right to a speedy and public trial, by an
> impartial jury of the state and district wherein the
> crime shall have been committed, which district shall
> have been previously ascertained by law, and to be
> informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to
> be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have
> compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his
> favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his
> defense."
>
> Have those guys down in Quantanamo received their
> speedy and public trials yet? Have they been informed
> of the nature and cause of the accusations against
> them? Have they been provided counsel for their
> defense?

17. Liberty or Death Reply

Enemy combatants do not come under the protection of the US Constitution. Never have. They come under the protection of International agreement such as the Geneva Accords, if they meet the qualifying requirements. They don't. Bottom line they have no legal status. What the Supreme Court did recently in giving the Gitmo guys Habeas Corpus was wrong and congress should over rule the court.
>
18. H said

I've sworn to defend the Constitution of the United
> State several times in my life. I made that oath
> without reservation and fully knowing the consequences
> of that action. Although I don't consider the
> Constitution a perfect document, I find the values are
> values I can defend.
>
> The current Administration seems to treat the
> Constitution as guidance and not the law of the land.
> For that reason, I will not be sorry when they have
> gone.

19. Liberty or Death Reply

I am afraid you have yet to provide a case where Bush violated the law. Any law.

Comments: Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?



Previous Posts
Dialogue on Iraq 1. V Said You somehow seem to d...
Middle East Dialogue, Some History 1. V said Th...
The Search for the Guilty for the Debacle in Iraq ...
How to Defeat Terrorists and fight Modern Wars Le...
The Tax Reform Gordian Knot The following is a si...
Maliki Challenges Bush Maliki laid his cards on t...
Another Opportunity Slipping Away In Iraq The Bus...
Foreign Policy for a One Super Power World This i...
Bush Makes it Impossible to Win in Iraq Yesterday...
Why American Patience Has Run Out on Iraq The Ame...