Fallujah

[ordos45]

[hide]http://fallujapictures.blogspot.com/[/hide] 

Gore warning.  Intense gore warning at times.

[Digital Guerrilla]

"The obliteration of Fallujah continues apace. Article 6(b) of the 1945 Nuremberg Charter defines a Nuremberg War Crime in relevant part as the ". . . wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages. . ." According to this definitive definition, the Bush Jr. administration's destruction of Fallujah constitutes a war crime for which Nazis were tried and executed. There is nothing surprising about that.

Since the Bush Jr. administration's installation in power by the United States Supreme Court in January of 2001, the peoples of the world have witnessed a government in the United States of America that has demonstrated little if any respect for fundamental considerations of international law, international organizations, and human rights, let alone appreciation of the requirements for maintaining international peace and security. What the world has watched instead is a comprehensive and malicious assault upon the integrity of the international legal order by a group of men and women who are thoroughly Machiavellian in their perception of international relations and in their conduct of both foreign policy and domestic affairs. This is not simply a question of giving or withholding the benefit of the doubt when it comes to complicated matters of foreign affairs and defense policies to a U.S. government charged with the security of both its own citizens and those of its allies in Europe, the Western Hemisphere, and the Pacific. Rather, the Bush Jr. administration's foreign policy constitutes ongoing criminal activity under well-recognized principles of both international law and U.S. domestic law, in particular the Nuremberg Charter, the Nuremberg Judgment, and the Nuremberg Principles. So their obliteration of Fallujah was to be expected."

Francis A. Boyle, Professor of Law, University of Illinois

[Megashrap]

"The obliteration of Fallujah continues apace. Article 6(b) of the 1945 Nuremberg Charter defines a Nuremberg War Crime in relevant part as the ". . . wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages. . ." According to this definitive definition, the Bush Jr. administration's destruction of Fallujah constitutes a war crime for which Nazis were tried and executed. There is nothing surprising about that.

  The way Iraq invaded Kuwait and what they did to the city, or the way Sadam handled Kurdish towns is way more along the lines of that particular type of war crime.  Troops are not in Fallujah for the purpose of simply obliterating the city, rape the women, kill the males, round up and detain any "undesired humans" to be shipped of to death camps.  However, given light to the fact that several different posts sum up the U.S. as nothing less than Nazi's, or Bush as Hitler coming from countries abroad for the most part it's honestly a "no shocker" to me that Fallujah would be considered somehow as a war crime comparable to Hitler.  Hmm who didn't see that coming?

[Dante]

Well killing the males certainly seems to be a priority...

Having said that, newspaper yesterday reported that the US forces made it known that they would be giving out food at a certain mosque. As soon as a large crowd arrived they 'inspected' any male between the ages of 16 and sixty-something, and arrested any with traces of gunpowder on them. 45 arrests.

[Megashrap]

Well killing the males certainly seems to be a priority...

Having said that, newspaper yesterday reported that the US forces made it known that they would be giving out food at a certain mosque. As soon as a large crowd arrived they 'inspected' any male between the ages of 16 and sixty-something, and arrested any with traces of gunpowder on them. 45 arrests.

This is also nothing new.  Checking for gunpowder residue has been going on since the war started throughout checkpoints in Iraq. And the fact that some were "pursuaded" to be arrested is nothing more than phsycological type of warfare.  That too is also nothing new.

[Dante]

And tricking civilians into thinking they'll get food? That's nothing new as well? And everyone who has gunpowder traces is automatically guilty? Nothing new?

[Megashrap]

And tricking civilians into thinking they'll get food? That's nothing new as well?

They were fed btw. If you mean was there a cafe waiting for them right away, no that wasen't what we were trying to accomplish.

And everyone who has gunpowder traces is automatically guilty? Nothing new?

No on claimed they were guilty, suspicious enough to warrant being detained? yes afraid so.

[Megashrap]

  Somehow I think many conveniently miss the fact that the U.S. troops are trying to weed out, and yes if need be kill Insugents.  If the U.S. wanted to merely destroy the town itself, that could be accomplished in rather a few seconds.

[Dante]

Point 1- And how exactly will these suspicions be confirmed or disproved?

Point 2- How would anyone who was actually working against the invaders ever fall for the food trick?

Point 3- Serve 'em right if it's a woman who sets the next bomb.

Edit: Point 4- Not missing that at all. Just disagree with it. As I do most things regarding this war.

[erjin999]

  Somehow I think many conveniently miss the fact that the U.S. troops are trying to weed out, and yes if need be kill Insugents.  If the U.S. wanted to merely destroy the town itself, that could be accomplished in rather a few seconds.

Insurgents....is that like freedom fighters ?

[Megashrap]

Point 1- And how exactly will these suspicions be confirmed or disproved?

Since when does the military for any country for that matter, have press conferrences after each and every move they perform?

Point 2- How would anyone who was actually working against the invaders ever fall for the food trick?

[Megashrap]

Insurgents....is that like freedom fighters ?

[Dante]

Since when does the military for any country for that matter, have press conferrences after each and every move they perform?

Since they started to perform badly.

Well it seemed to work for several.

Guilty until proven innocent, eh?

A woman with a bomb would really be no surprise to what troops have experienced there thusfar. Plus considering they often even resort to using dead bodies for bombs, booby trabs etc..

Then why oh why aren't the women being taken in when they go for food?

Well I agree that we disagree.

Well that kind of goes without saying...

[Megashrap]

Guilty until proven innocent, eh?

No, more like suspicious and possibly life threatening until determined otherwise.

Somehow I can't help but get the impression that maybe you are relating a current wartime combat infantyman, with that of a modern day traffic cop in terms of thier legal obligations, or duties. Apples and Oranges.

[Dante]

Same thing.

[Andrew]

  Basically those uprising or rebelling against a government, authority, leaderships, establishments etc.

I would think that they are defying the US occupation.

[Dante]

Freedom fighters are terrorists who won.

[ordos45]

Freedom fighters are terrorists who won.

Ah, but is it truly that objective?  What about the other month when hundreds of bodies were found murdered by the 'freedom fighters' for various 'crimes'?  Freedom fighters are terrorists who won, but they usually are also the ones who don't commit the atrocities they accuse their oppresors of.

[Anathema]

[Megashrap]

Hitler is not a standard of measurement when it comes to ethics you know.

Ah I see, but it's ok to use Hitler as a comparison to judge what the U.S. is currently trying to achieve? or our current president being compared to him, or how about the "war crimes" that some have claimed we have committed that were somehow the equivelant of what "Nazi's" did?

Don't tell me I use Hitler as some sort of a measure for ethics, when actually for the most part i've been defending the U.S. against such idiotic comparisons.

[Anathema]

I didn't use Hitler to compare anything, you used a comparison with Hitler to say that the US ain't half as bad as he was as some sort of odd justification.

[erjin999]

  Basically those uprising or rebelling against a government, authority, leaderships, establishments etc.

Which government ? The puppet Iraqi Governemnt ? The Iraqi Authority, which is basically American Authority ? etc..etc...

[Megashrap]

I didn't use Hitler to compare anything, you used a comparison with Hitler to say that the US ain't half as bad as he was as some sort of odd justification.

Again wrong,

Quote from: scar5150 on Yesterday at 22:40:24

[Andrew]

I would think that they are defying the US occupation.

Is my guess. They never rebelled against Saddam from what I remember. So why would they rebel against USA who is wanting to help Iraq? Because they don't want America telling them what to do. And of course a puppet will be elected, who is on side with america. I think it would be funny if a rebel leader was elected (although my guess is rebels who oppose america are not allowed on the ballot ::)) and then denounced america. Would america simply go back home because they accomplished what they came to do which was to spread freedom and to get rid of Saddam? What if the people elected a dictator (without being forced to, but because they like him)?

[ordos45]

Actually Andrew there was a rather large rebellion against Saddam in 1991 following the first Gulf War.  However the treaty with the Coalition allowed him to keep his helicopters.  Those that rose up against him throughout most of the provinces were slaughtered, awaiting U.S. aid that had been implied, but never came.