Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Huang who wrote (3685)	1/25/2003 2:30:28 PM
From: Crimson Ghost	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

I would go one step beyond this. Most nations will want the US to pay a heavy price for an Iraq adventure because that is the best way to prevent such madness from happening again. So I suspect Iraq will get a lot of covert help from many sources if the US attacks.

To: Ed Huang who wrote (3685)	1/25/2003 3:38:32 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Are War Crimes possible in a new War against Iraq...? ________________________________________________________ U.S. lawyers warn Bush, Rumsfeld, on war crimes By Grant McCool 24 Jan 2003 20:48 NEW YORK, Jan 24 (Reuters) - A group of U.S. law professors opposed to a possible war on Iraq warned U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday that he and senior government officials could be prosecuted for war crimes if military tactics violated international humanitarian law. "Our primary concern ... is the large number of civilian casualties that may result should U.S. and coalition forces fail to comply with international humanitarian law in using force against Iraq," the group, led by the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, said in a letter to Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The group cited the particular need for U.S. and coalition forces to abide by humanitarian law requiring warring parties to distinguish between military and civilian areas, use only the level of force that is militarily necessary and to use weaponry that is proportionate to what is being targeted. The letter, which had more than 100 signatories, said the rules had been broken in other recent wars. It said air strikes on populated cities, carpet bombing and the use of fuel-air explosives were examples of inappropriate military action taken during the 1991 Gulf War, the 1999 Kosovo campaign and the 2001 Afghan conflict that led to civilian casualties and might be used again in Iraq. The letter to Bush and Rumsfeld coincided with similar notes sent this week to British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien by lawyers in those countries. Ironically, Bush on Wednesday advised Iraqi officers and soldiers to disobey any orders to use weapons of mass destruction in the event of a conflict. "If you choose to do so, when Iraq is liberated, you will be treated, tried and persecuted as a war criminal," he said. On Sunday, Rumsfeld said he would favor granting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and senior Iraqi leaders immunity from possible war crimes prosecution if it would clear the way for their exile and avoid a war. INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT Government officials in Britain and Canada could theoretically be investigated by the new International Criminal Court in The Hague if it was determined that international laws had been broken in war. The United States has refused to cooperate with the court and has withdrawn its signature from the treaty establishing it. The letter to Blair, dated Jan. 22, from Public Interest Lawyers said that if Britain's actions in Iraq were deemed possible war crimes, "we, and others, will take steps to ensure that you, and other leaders of the U.K. government are held accountable." The Canadian group, Lawyers Against the War, said in its letter dated Jan. 20, that it was putting Chretien's government on notice that without explicit U.N. Security Council approval for a war on Iraq, "we will pursue all responsible government officials on charges of murder and crimes against humanity in both the Canadian and the international criminal courts." One of the leading signatories to the letter to Bush said although Washington was not a party to the ICC, U.S. officials could still be prosecuted under the Geneva Convention. "War crimes under that convention can be prosecuted wherever the perpetrators are found," said Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights. He said the situation could be likened to the attempt by a Spanish magistrate to prosecute former Chilean military dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1996 for human rights violations during his rule. alertnet.org

To: Ed Huang who wrote (3685)	1/25/2003 10:39:43 PM
From: PartyTime	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Bush in a Box. And I bet when he goes to sleep at night, being in this box this haunts him like the mother of all nightmares yet to happen. 'Cept he knows he's already in the box. The way I see it, Bush has one viable option to end this stalemate in a dignified and honorable manner, and in a way sensitive to all parties involved. In short, a way to declare victory without the need for war! America must first to call for a worldwide conference to comprehensively study exactly what breeds terrorism, why it takes hold and in what societies. Ultimately, why such actions lead to the deaths of so many innocent people worldwide. Theme: What can be done to improve people of the world. Bush should request that the UN inspection team be doubled or tripled, perhaps even larger if necessary. Assure that this process has an unlimited budget and the best resources available on earth. After all, if Cheney's Haliburton buddies can get a no ceiling (was there any bid?) food contract for feeding overseas troops, why can't the UN at least get this? The new and revitalized inspection team doing the work in Iraq will not include American inspectors. Americans will participate primarily in an advisory role, sharing intelligence and guidance, but will stay out of the country. Right now, there's too much bad blood between the US and Iraq and it's always the US spy thing that bogs down the inspection process. Leaving the Americans out of this process will help to reduce tension, making the team itself more credible. In parallel with all of the above Bush should push for a limited phase out for lifting the UN sanctions against Iraq. This is necessary because of well-documented effects these sanctions have had upon the Iraqi citizenry, who never did anything to anybody. The resultant trade from the lifting of sanctions will enable other nations to take more proactive interest in Iraq, and this is good. Bush should also use the bully pulpit to bring together, if not the leaders themselves, at least Israeli and Palestinian top-notched negotiators. He should bring them to Camp David for new talks. Insist to both parties that if they don't heed his call to negotiate, all foreign assistance will cease at a time certain. Put Powell in charge of the negotiations. Even bring in Ford, Carter and Clinton even in order to show that this really counts. Consistent with the Camp David talks again use the bully pulpit to bring together Middle Eastern Arab leaders for a conference with a two-pronged objective: 1) Establish an Arabian watchdog group to: a) assist the UN inspection team; b) help mediate Saddam back into the fold of being a good leader, instead of a bad leader; c) determine a new policy for oil distribution that is sensitive to the needs of each Middle Eastern nation's respective economies and a means by which the profits from same can improve living conditions for those living in hardship; and d) establish an Arab study group to monitor the Camp David talks involving Isarael and Palestine and to determine how best to help mend the ages-worn conflict and eventually participate in that dialogue with the Israeli and Palestinian leaders. 2) Push for each of these nations to put out a united call to condemn terrorism. Conclusion: Confident that some, if not all of the above, is in motion, me thinks Bush could go to sleep at night thinking he's on the verge of actually accomplishing something no other president has managed to do. Indeed, he'd be sleeping out of the box and would wake up each day feeling nice, that just maybe he'd done something to help make the world a better place. And if a model can be established in the Middle East, the rest of the world awaits nurturing also. Give peace and meaningful self-determination a change. I mean ... why not!