| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
The King Of Karaoke
> Teenager of the Year <
USA
3759 Posts |
 Posted - 09/17/2004 : 20:51:18
|
Iraq war illegal, says Annan
09/16/04 "BBC" --The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.
He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally.
The UK government responded by saying the attorney-general made the "legal basis... clear at the time".
Mr Annan also warned security in Iraq must considerably improve if credible elections are to be held in January.
The UN chief said in an interview with the BBC World Service that "painful lessons" had been learnt since the war in Iraq.
"Lessons for the US, the UN and other member states. I think in the end everybody's concluded it's best to work together with our allies and through the UN," he said.
'Valid'
"I hope we do not see another Iraq-type operation for a long time - without UN approval and much broader support from the international community," he added.
He said he believed there should have been a second UN resolution following Iraq's failure to comply over weapons inspections.
And it should have been up to the Security Council to approve or determine the consequences, he added.
When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."
Mr Annan's comments provoked angry suggestions from a former Bush administration aide that they were timed to influence the US November election.
"I think it is outrageous for the Secretary-General, who ultimately works for the member states, to try and supplant his judgement for the judgement of the member states," Randy Scheunemann, a former advisor to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told the BBC.
"To do this 51 days before an American election reeks of political interference."
A UK foreign office spokeswoman said: "The Attorney-General made the government's position on the legal basis for the use of military force in Iraq clear at the time".
Australian Prime Minister John Howard also rejected Mr Annan's remarks, saying the legal advice he was given was "entirely valid".
The BBC's Susannah Price at UN headquarters in New York says Mr Annan has made similar comments before.
He has said from the beginning the invasion did not conform with the UN charter - phrasing that was seen as a diplomatic way of saying the war was illegal.
Our correspondent says Mr Annan's relationship with the US might be made a little uncomfortable for a while following his comments, but both sides are likely to want to play it down.
US President George W Bush is due to speak at the UN General Assembly next week.
Iraq elections
Mr Annan also said in the interview the UN would give advice and assistance in the run-up to the elections, but it was up to the Iraqi interim government to decide whether such a vote should go ahead.
He warned there could not be "credible elections if the security conditions continue as they are now".
The UK foreign office spokeswoman said there was a full commitment to hold elections in January.
Election and political party laws had already been passed and an independent electoral commission established.
"The task is huge and the deadline tight, but the Iraqi people clearly want elections," she said.
On Wednesday, the head of the British army General Sir Mike Jackson said national elections in Iraq were still on track.
On Monday, Iraq's interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said elections must go ahead as planned although he conceded the violence might stop some Iraqis voting.
However, a day later a car bomb close to an Iraqi police station in central Baghdad killed 47 people and gunmen opened fire on a police minibus in Baquba, killing 12.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm
Published: 2004/09/16 09:21:31 GMT
© BBC MMIV
-------------------------------------
|
|
|
slaveish
= Cult of Ray =
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2004 : 22:57:09
|
| Yes, Bush and his cronies believe the rules don't apply to them. Invade Iraq, ignore the Kyoto Accord, steal the election, lie to the American public repeatedly and convincingly. Having a powerful ex-President father doesn't hurt either. |
 |
|
|
whoreatthedoor
> Teenager of the Year <
Spain
2873 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 00:14:30
|
And what the hell needs a war to be "legal"?
"¿Qué estás buscando? ¿Te gustaría multiplicarte por diez, por cien?, ¿Estás buscando adeptos? ¡Busca ceros entonces!" |
|
|
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6214 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 01:22:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by The King Of Karaoke
He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally.
-------------------------------------
Yes, mace windu and yoda should have had a say in this
 "I joined the Cult of Serge/'Cause he invented indierock before Frank did" |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 05:47:55
|
KOFI TALK [Cliff May] Sep 16, 2004
http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/corner.asp
"About 6 o’clock last night, I received a call from the BBC.
It seems Kofi Annan had given the BBC an interview in which he said that the US intervention in Iraq was “illegal.”
The BBC folks were very excited about this; never before had Kofi had gone quite that far.
But to round out the story they wanted a response from a bona fide American unilateralist-cum-troglodyte -- so they called me. I was happy to oblige.
I explained as best I could that Kofi Annan is entitled to his personal opinions, but that we should understand he is not the Chief Justice of a World Supreme Court, and he is not President of a world government.
He heads up an international debating society. His pronouncements on international law are not final or even authoritative.
I added that if legalities were under discussion, Mr. Annan might want to discuss history’s largest corruption scandal which took place under his auspices. (It would be helpful were he to at least release the records on the UN Food for Oil program to investigators – or to Claudia Rosett.)
Also, on his watch, numerous crimes against humanity are now being committed, for example in Sudan and North Korea. He evidently is not “seized with these issues.” And we should not forget Rwanda where a genocide was committed that did not appear to rankle him nearly so much as the liberation of Iraq from one of the world’s most brutal and dangerous dictators.
The BBC interviewer, of course, was not persuaded. He was far too gleeful about the UN Secretary General calling the US an international criminal, a view he clearly shared. The BBC has become so ideologically biased as to make Dan Rather look like Brian Lamb. "
Denis Boyles Sep 17, 2004
http://nationalreview.com/europress/boyles200409170858.asp
"The U.N.'s Kofi Annan presided over the massive robbery committed by the U.N. in its Oil for Food program. Among many other missteps, he also supported the evisceration of the U.N.'s credibility by siding with France and Germany to urge that U.N. Security Council resolutions be disregarded in the case of Iraq, or made useless to stop a genocide, as in the case of Darfur. Now Annan is slapping back. Last week, he charged in a BBC report that the invasion of Iraq was "illegal." The charge was happily repeated by Libération and the rest of the EuroPress, since the real crime isn't the UN's failures, it's the lack of credibility of American policy."
|
|
|
|
apl4eris
~ Abstract Brain ~
USA
4800 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 07:42:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
...And we should not forget Rwanda where a genocide was committed that did not appear to rankle him nearly so much as the liberation of Iraq from one of the world’s most brutal and dangerous dictators.
...because the U.S. refused to accept that it was a genocide and refused to send troops after the U.N. asked for international peace-keeping support to halt the genocide. |
|
|
|
apl4eris
~ Abstract Brain ~
USA
4800 Posts |
|
|
whoreatthedoor
> Teenager of the Year <
Spain
2873 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 08:59:33
|
After the Iraq war incident, the UN should disappear. Nobody cares what they say. Remember, US were'nt the only ones who ignored them, my own country  *sniff* and many others did the same.
"¿Qué estás buscando? ¿Te gustaría multiplicarte por diez, por cien?, ¿Estás buscando adeptos? ¡Busca ceros entonces!" |
|
|
|
VoVat
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
9168 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 12:43:01
|
quote:
And what the hell needs a war to be "legal"?
Approval from the authorities, I guess. I agree that it's an awfully ridiculous concept, but I guess a war approved by more than one country is going to be at least a little less wrong than something like the invasion of Iraq.
"Signature quotes are so lame." --Nathan |
|
|
|
apl4eris
~ Abstract Brain ~
USA
4800 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 16:19:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by whoreatthedoor
And what the hell needs a war to be "legal"?
I'm not sure if the question was rhetorical, but it's an interesting debate, so I hope you don't mind me talking to your point a little. I think the idea of rules of engagement is hypocritical, and the rules are for the winners to enforce after they have won.
The idea of a "Just War" is what "civilized" nations use to maintain order and civility. It is, in part, the foundation of the Geneva Conventions, and why it is considered illegal to kill civilians or to torture prisoners of an enemy nation's military force. It establishes certain principles to allow wars to be waged without causing complete destruction of civilization, and also to protect our servicemen and women and our own civilians from undue harm (in theory)...I guess so we can live on to fight more wars.
I don't know if I can summarize it very well right now cause I'm hopped up on Midol, but here is a good resource:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/j/justwar.htm |
|
|
|
NimrodsSon
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1938 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2004 : 17:59:21
|
The fact that the words legal and war can be used in the same sentence, shows a great deal how fucked up a world we live in.
¡Viva los Católicos! |
|
|
|
whoreatthedoor
> Teenager of the Year <
Spain
2873 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2004 : 02:46:22
|
I don't know if it was rhetorical or not. Just a thought.
Another sign of world's madness: A ridiculous country like Spain challenging the UN without being punished. As someone said above (hey! it was me!) the UN should disappear.
"¿Qué estás buscando? ¿Te gustaría multiplicarte por diez, por cien?, ¿Estás buscando adeptos? ¡Busca ceros entonces!" |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4109 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2004 : 08:47:01
|
| Portugal didn´t behave as I would like...I was very ashamed of what they did! But that´s why I hate politicians! |
|
|
|
VoVat
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
9168 Posts |
Posted - 09/20/2004 : 17:45:48
|
Portugal should be sent to its room without dinner! That'll show it to misbehave!
"Signature quotes are so lame." --Nathan |
|
|
|
Cult_Of_Frank
= Black Noise Maker =
Canada
11687 Posts |
Posted - 09/20/2004 : 20:44:02
|
Spain could never defy the UN in that sort of a way without the US in cahoots. The sanctions would be far too great.
However, with so much of the world's stability, economically, socially, and politically, resting in the hands of the US, there's really nothing that the other countries are willing to do to punish them or their collaborators, as such punishments would inevitably hurt them as well. So, unfortunately, the US is free to ignore international law, will, and intelligence at its leisure. Which essentially makes the UN useless since its foundation was based on countries like the US participating legally, willfully, and setting a good example. The balance of power with other veto-holding nations was the other thing to keep the US in check, but that has since eroded leaving the US firmly in control.
So how can Spain challenge the UN and not be punished? Because they didn't. The US did, and since nobody wants to punish their arrogance, all involved nations are off scott-free. And even if a proposal was introduced (which would make that country quite unpopular with the US, I'm sure), and even if it passed, the US can veto it. Veto power was a ridiculous concession to give, but try removing it now.
 "Join the Cult of Frank 2.0 / And you'll be enlightened (free for 1.x members)" |
|
|
|
Hanoi333
- FB Fan -
Netherlands
70 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2004 : 02:06:17
|
Almost all of the wars America has fought since WW 2 in the past were illegal. However some have proven to be better choices than others. e.g Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Kossovo, Afghanistan, Somalia,Iraq (1+2).
Only the interventions in Yugoslavia have proven to be somewhat succesfull.
Gulf War 1 was probably a legal war, but it was clear ,that just like this Iraq war, it is all about the US oil interests.
|
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2004 : 08:45:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cult_Of_Frank
So, unfortunately, the US is free to ignore international law, will, and intelligence at its leisure. Which essentially makes the UN useless since its foundation was based on countries like the US participating legally, willfully, and setting a good example.
I don't understand how you can continue to associate the UN with international law. The UN spoke for decades without meaningful action or follow-through, to the point that both their word and the law upon which it allegedly rests have been utterly disgraced. At best the UN is the corrupt sheriff, bought and paid for, aspiring to little more than aligning itself with the strongest gang in town. Given "oil-for-food" and the UN's failure to assist investigations into its own apparent corruption, how can you continue to chastise the US for rejecting the moral authority of the UN? Hell, in the past week we have heard that some of the money Saddam made off the whole scandal most likely went to Al Qaeda and may in fact be funding them to this day. I really don't get it: isn't it enough that the UN is the tool of the discredited regimes of France, Germany, Russia, and China? Why should the US respect that? |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2004 : 09:14:39
|
Erebus said:
isn't it enough that the UN is the tool of the discredited regimes of France, Germany, Russia, and China? Why should the US respect that?
France and Germany dicredited by who? G W Bush? you?
Why someone should respect an other's opinion? because that's what respect is about.
I agree UN is not an international government, and prove is unability to resolve many conflicts (Israël Vs Palestinian, Rwanda,...).But how can you keep on supporting this war?
Everyday brings proof in the contrary. Muslims fanatics never got so angry against occidental countries, in Iraq civilians dies everyday from US bllets or terrorist attacks,...
What France and Germany did not wanted is that someone open pandora's box. GW Bush, with Blair, Aznar, Berlusconi and others did it.
war against terrorism must be done, it's a fact. But what we have here is absolutly not that. It's a way to sell Bush's friends weapon, to get the oil for Bush's friends. Nothing more nothing less.
Fight terrorism by helping poor countries, search and destroy training camps, infiltrate terrorist groups, and I'll be okay.
Erebus you're out of your element. You don't know what you're talking about |
Edited by - remig on 09/21/2004 09:18:53 |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2004 : 09:29:00
|
Oh and your National (front) Review...
|
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2004 : 10:04:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by remig
Erebus said:
isn't it enough that the UN is the tool of the discredited regimes of France, Germany, Russia, and China? Why should the US respect that?
France and Germany dicredited by who? G W Bush? you?
Why someone should respect an other's opinion? because that's what respect is about.
I agree UN is not an international government, and prove is unability to resolve many conflicts (Israël Vs Palestinian, Rwanda,...).But how can you keep on supporting this war?
Everyday brings proof in the contrary. Muslims fanatics never got so angry against occidental countries, in Iraq civilians dies everyday from US bllets or terrorist attacks,...
What France and Germany did not wanted is that someone open pandora's box. GW Bush, with Blair, Aznar, Berlusconi and others did it.
war against terrorism must be done, it's a fact. But what we have here is absolutly not that. It's a way to sell Bush's friends weapon, to get the oil for Bush's friends. Nothing more nothing less.
Fight terrorism by helping poor countries, search and destroy training camps, infiltrate terrorist groups, and I'll be okay.
Erebus you're out of your element. You don't know what you're talking about
France never met an anti-American dictator it didn't love. And all the countries I named were up to their necks in illegal dealings with Saddam. Just this week it is emerging that the French were behind the forged Nigerian documents. The French couldn't wait to conduct joint naval exercises with Communist China during a Taiwan-China heat up a couple years ago. It is common knowledge that France is about two things: myopic pursuit of selfish goals and being a permanent pain in the ass to the English-speaking world. For Saddam-French links do a few google searches and READ.
Respect is not about unqualified regard for the opinion of others. Respect is earned, and it is retained or forfeited on the basis of merit.
How can you say Muslim fanatics never got so angry? 9-11 preceded Afghanistan and Iraq, and 9-11 was angry enough for the US to put an end to it.
France exists within a cultural bubble, subject to thought control almost as complete as that of any other culture on earth, so don't lecture me on my "element" and don't pretend the French have any special insight into anything beyond their own self interenst. |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2004 : 00:34:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
quote:
Originally posted by remig
Erebus said:
isn't it enough that the UN is the tool of the discredited regimes of France, Germany, Russia, and China? Why should the US respect that?
France and Germany dicredited by who? G W Bush? you?
Why someone should respect an other's opinion? because that's what respect is about.
I agree UN is not an international government, and prove is unability to resolve many conflicts (Israël Vs Palestinian, Rwanda,...).But how can you keep on supporting this war?
Everyday brings proof in the contrary. Muslims fanatics never got so angry against occidental countries, in Iraq civilians dies everyday from US bllets or terrorist attacks,...
What France and Germany did not wanted is that someone open pandora's box. GW Bush, with Blair, Aznar, Berlusconi and others did it.
war against terrorism must be done, it's a fact. But what we have here is absolutly not that. It's a way to sell Bush's friends weapon, to get the oil for Bush's friends. Nothing more nothing less.
Fight terrorism by helping poor countries, search and destroy training camps, infiltrate terrorist groups, and I'll be okay.
Erebus you're out of your element. You don't know what you're talking about
France never met an anti-American dictator it didn't love. And all the countries I named were up to their necks in illegal dealings with Saddam. Just this week it is emerging that the French were behind the forged Nigerian documents. The French couldn't wait to conduct joint naval exercises with Communist China during a Taiwan-China heat up a couple years ago. It is common knowledge that France is about two things: myopic pursuit of selfish goals and being a permanent pain in the ass to the English-speaking world. For Saddam-French links do a few google searches and READ.
Respect is not about unqualified regard for the opinion of others. Respect is earned, and it is retained or forfeited on the basis of merit.
How can you say Muslim fanatics never got so angry? 9-11 preceded Afghanistan and Iraq, and 9-11 was angry enough for the US to put an end to it.
France exists within a cultural bubble, subject to thought control almost as complete as that of any other culture on earth, so don't lecture me on my "element" and don't pretend the French have any special insight into anything beyond their own self interenst.
All those accusations...
So what? did I say French governement were angels?
Each rich country does this, and US is not the last at that kind of game.
And please stop saying "french" but talk about Chirac, Mitterand or whoever.
I never says "those americans", it would mean I include in the same bag Bush, Cheney, Frank Black, the cool people on the forum, my favorite writers...
|
|
|
|
astrology
= Cult of Ray =
Saint Lucia
252 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2004 : 08:53:25
|
well
those agains Irak war are saved
those in favoir will rot in hell ok?
there is no discussion this is a genocied and a massaccre
and thos deaf dumb and blind who agree are agreeing with things like this
http://www.einswine.com/atrocities/du/
and deserve that their sons and daughters to be born like these poor children
and I hope they do..
Do you have another opinion? Mr/mrs/ms.- Grieves?
and this is not the worse
USA-Uk/australia and Spain gvts have killed their citizens thru mossad to fool them into war.
http://www.joevialls.co.uk/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/tiki-index.php
http://www.rense.com/
http://www.100777.com/
Citizen in democracy have not only the right but the obligation of being informed, because they may become accomplices in their goverments' crimes..
I'm a pistolero, i'm not shakin in my boots
I'm the ruler of this moon, if u move I shoots
Truth is out There, but Mulder cannot find G-Gal's G-point.
erection is no poltergeist, even if its Majestic |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2004 : 09:05:06
|
Man, you're nuts.
I disagree and I won't debate.
***********************************************
So you have no point of reference, Donny.
You're like a child that wanders INTO THE MIDDLE OF A MOVIE! |
|
|
|
VoVat
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
9168 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2004 : 17:06:29
|
quote:
It is common knowledge that France is about two things: myopic pursuit of selfish goals
Yeah, we'd never do anything like that in the United States!
Oh, wait...
"Signature quotes are so lame." --Nathan |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Iraq war illegal
