Thats what I was getting to. The whole Iraqi invasion disobeys the geneva convention and the UN charter and never sanctioned by it, no matter how low the opinions about the UN are after the recent events but its the closet thing to a world body we have today.
So anybodys refusal to fight it on those grounds are valid as they constitute illegal orders
The UN is not the world government, despite your love for them.
They are citizens of the USA, bound by the laws of the USA.
All the UN BS is just blah blah blah.
PublicAnimalNo9
CKA Uber
Posts: 14139
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:24 am
desertdude desertdude:
Thats not my point Guy atleast not in my last post where brock called it bollocks that its does not violate the geneva convention or the UN charter. Nor was it sanctioned by the UN.
One of the major reasons why Canada did not go to war in Iraq, and might have, had the UN sanctioned it.
No actually, the MAJOR reason we didn't go to Iraq was the majority of our combat troops are/were in A-Stan. Couldn't have contributed enough to Iraq to make a difference. Other than our JTF2 forces which were in Iraq IIRC, or at least elements of it were attached to US units.
As far as it being a just war, it's iffy. Quite bluntly, the US and Britain helped create the situation in Iraq in the first place. The problem is, when ppl hear WMDs they think nukes and completely forget that bio and chem weapons are included. Iraq had chem weapons and facilities to make 'em thanks mostly in part to the US and Britain, no big secret there. However, I believe that the cluster fuck in Iraq wouldn't be happening right now if it hadn't been for the US and UK "selling" Iraq chem weapon capabilities in the 1st place.
desertdude
CKA Elite
Posts: 4235
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:35 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Show me where either convention was breached DD.
You called it bollocks so actually the burden of proof lies on you, but I'll indulge you a little bit. I already posted a link with Kofi Annan's statement declaring the Iraq war Illegal
Also
$1:
The Prime Minister of Canada at the time, Jean Chrétien, advised Governor General Adrienne Clarkson to not have Canada "join with the so-called Coalition of the willing" that was central to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This position was consistent with that which the Prime Minister had earlier expressed before the 19 March 2003 invasion of Iraq; namely, that "Canada was unlikely to join an invasion without explicit support from the United Nations."The decision by the United Nations (UN) on whether or not to sanction the invasion rested on two elements: a discussion of international law, including the Nuremberg Principles on preemptive war; and the UN inspections for Iraq's alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Thats not my point Guy atleast not in my last post where brock called it bollocks that its does not violate the geneva convention or the UN charter. Nor was it sanctioned by the UN.
One of the major reasons why Canada did not go to war in Iraq, and might have, had the UN sanctioned it.
No actually, the MAJOR reason we didn't go to Iraq was the majority of our combat troops are/were in A-Stan. Couldn't have contributed enough to Iraq to make a difference. Other than our JTF2 forces which were in Iraq IIRC, or at least elements of it were attached to US units.
As far as it being a just war, it's iffy. Quite bluntly, the US and Britain helped create the situation in Iraq in the first place. The problem is, when ppl hear WMDs they think nukes and completely forget that bio and chem weapons are included. Iraq had chem weapons and facilities to make 'em thanks mostly in part to the US and Britain, no big secret there. However, I believe that the cluster fuck in Iraq wouldn't be happening right now if it hadn't been for the US and UK "selling" Iraq chem weapon capabilities in the 1st place.
According to the Govt backed Iraq Survey Group On October 6, 2004,, Charles Duelfer the head of the group, announced to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee that the group found no evidence that Iraq under Saddam Hussein had produced and stockpiled any weapons of mass destruction ( Which also included chemical and biological wespons.) since 1991, when UN sanctions were imposed.
desertdude
CKA Elite
Posts: 4235
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:44 am
martin14 martin14:
The UN is not the world government, despite your love for them.
They are citizens of the USA, bound by the laws of the USA.
All the UN BS is just blah blah blah.
One reason your own goverment refused to go to war in Iraq because the UN did not sanction it. You can cry and shout as much as you like but the facts remain.
And you can't play on the legitamacy of the UN as and when you please. You lost the seat in the UN. Now man the fuck up and get over it.
martin14
CKA Uber
Posts: 33691
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:11 am
$1:
One reason your own goverment refused to go to war in Iraq because the UN did not sanction it. You can cry and shout as much as you like but the facts remain.
And you can't play on the legitamacy of the UN as and when you please. You lost the seat in the UN. Now man the fuck up and get over it.
UN sanctioning something or not doesnt make it legal.
Please show me the clause signed by the US that they accept UN bullshit in war as legally binding. Please show me the clause where US soldiers are bound to the ICC, and not the US.
Those are the real facts, not ur world government delusions.
Now, since these shitheads have committed a crime inside the US, and we do have agreements on repatriating criminals, we should send them all back.. now.
Oh and please stop the legitimacy of the UN. We arent pissed off about the seat, we have been pissed at the UN for decades. You are the only one here who thinks the UN is worth anything, the rest of us know better.
desertdude
CKA Elite
Posts: 4235
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:28 am
More whining and bitching and being a sore loser, but was too much to expect to get anything even worth a dime from you anyways.
And just to indulge a fool ( feeling generous today )
The whole basis of going to war with Iraq were these terrible WMD Saddam had been stock piling. How many did they find, oh thats right. They didn't.
Just to help you out. If you had any brains or reasonable discussion skills for that matter you could point out that there had been violations of the 1991 sanctions and try get some credibilty and take it from there. But again like I said its too much to ask of you.
So in the future it better to just ignore bottom feeders like you when it comes to any reasonable discussion. When I'm in mood for some mindless dribble and online banter I'll know where to look
Cheers
ShepherdsDog
CKA Uber
Posts: 42160
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:39 am
$1:
I already posted a link with Kofi Annan's statement declaring the Iraq war Illegal
Posting links from years ago? Scraping the bottom aren't you?
Curtman
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:44 am
desertdude desertdude:
Prove me wrong, and if it is why isn't Canada involved in this "just" war ?
There's still time..
Stephen Harper Stephen Harper:
This party will not take its position based on public opinion polls. We will not take a stand based o n focus groups. We will not take a stand based o n phone-in shows or householder surveys or any other vagaries of public opinion… In my judgment Canada will eventually join with the allied coalition if war on Iraq comes to pass. The government will join, notwithstanding its failure to prepare, its neglect in co-operating with its allies, or its inability to contribute. In the end it will join out of the necessity created by a pattern of uncertainty and indecision. It will not join as a leader but unnoticed at the back of the parade.
EyeBrock
CKA Uber
Posts: 15681
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:07 am
desertdude desertdude:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Show me where either convention was breached DD.
You called it bollocks so actually the burden of proof lies on you, but I'll indulge you a little bit. I already posted a link with Kofi Annan's statement declaring the Iraq war Illegal
Also
$1:
The Prime Minister of Canada at the time, Jean Chrétien, advised Governor General Adrienne Clarkson to not have Canada "join with the so-called Coalition of the willing" that was central to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This position was consistent with that which the Prime Minister had earlier expressed before the 19 March 2003 invasion of Iraq; namely, that "Canada was unlikely to join an invasion without explicit support from the United Nations."The decision by the United Nations (UN) on whether or not to sanction the invasion rested on two elements: a discussion of international law, including the Nuremberg Principles on preemptive war; and the UN inspections for Iraq's alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
And I have to apply where I see fit re the Geneva Convention?
Hardly rock solid evidence. Try again to justify the crap you post.
martin14
CKA Uber
Posts: 33691
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:29 am
desertdude desertdude:
More whining and bitching and being a sore loser, but was too much to expect to get anything even worth a dime from you anyways.
And just to indulge a fool ( feeling generous today )
The whole basis of going to war with Iraq were these terrible WMD Saddam had been stock piling. How many did they find, oh thats right. They didn't.
Just to help you out. If you had any brains or reasonable discussion skills for that matter you could point out that there had been violations of the 1991 sanctions and try get some credibilty and take it from there. But again like I said its too much to ask of you.
So in the future it better to just ignore bottom feeders like you when it comes to any reasonable discussion. When I'm in mood for some mindless dribble and online banter I'll know where to look
Cheers
Careful DD, you are starting to sound like Derby.
Besides, aren't you boys supposed to have your meltdowns on Fridays, not Sundays ?
desertdude
CKA Elite
Posts: 4235
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:57 am
martin14 martin14:
desertdude desertdude:
More whining and bitching and being a sore loser, but was too much to expect to get anything even worth a dime from you anyways.
And just to indulge a fool ( feeling generous today )
The whole basis of going to war with Iraq were these terrible WMD Saddam had been stock piling. How many did they find, oh thats right. They didn't.
Just to help you out. If you had any brains or reasonable discussion skills for that matter you could point out that there had been violations of the 1991 sanctions and try get some credibilty and take it from there. But again like I said its too much to ask of you.
So in the future it better to just ignore bottom feeders like you when it comes to any reasonable discussion. When I'm in mood for some mindless dribble and online banter I'll know where to look
Cheers
Oh I didn't know you were touchy when called on your crap. I guess you never heard of if you can't take it, don't dish it out.
Ciao
Careful DD, you are starting to sound like Derby.
Besides, aren't you boys supposed to have your meltdowns on Fridays, not Sundays ?
desertdude
CKA Elite
Posts: 4235
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:00 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
desertdude desertdude:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Show me where either convention was breached DD.
You called it bollocks so actually the burden of proof lies on you, but I'll indulge you a little bit. I already posted a link with Kofi Annan's statement declaring the Iraq war Illegal
Also
$1:
The Prime Minister of Canada at the time, Jean Chrétien, advised Governor General Adrienne Clarkson to not have Canada "join with the so-called Coalition of the willing" that was central to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This position was consistent with that which the Prime Minister had earlier expressed before the 19 March 2003 invasion of Iraq; namely, that "Canada was unlikely to join an invasion without explicit support from the United Nations."The decision by the United Nations (UN) on whether or not to sanction the invasion rested on two elements: a discussion of international law, including the Nuremberg Principles on preemptive war; and the UN inspections for Iraq's alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
And I have to apply where I see fit re the Geneva Convention?
Hardly rock solid evidence. Try again to justify the crap you post.
Well you haven't provide a single line fron your side, plus as mentioned before the burden of proof lies with you as I called you to prove me wrong not vice versa. Anyways when I have the time I might get around to it.
Going through the lenghty Geneva convention really not on top of my piority list at the moment
Curtman
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:15 am
desertdude desertdude:
Well you haven't provide a single line fron your side, plus as mentioned before the burden of proof lies with you as I called you to prove me wrong not vice versa. Anyways when I have the time I might get around to it.
Standard EB discussion techniques: Ignore all evidence provided and claim there is none. Assassinate the character of the other party no matter how irrelevant it is. Provide unrelated stories about historical events.
desertdude desertdude:
Going through the lenghty Geneva convention really not on top of my piority list at the moment
Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff. Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded. For further information please visit the special project website http://www.collateralmurder.com. The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.
CKA Uber 
CKA Elite 
CKA Uber 
