Kofi Annan says Iraq War is illegal

Former Member

Story Here
Of course this has been said before, but maybe not by such a high profile figure. The question is, can he have anything done about it?

Former Member

Even if he dared to do anything about it, the right of veto 'certain' countries have would block any punitive moves.

However this has massive political repercussions. For starters is yet another excuse used by the warmongers that has been removed. The timing is good as well, since incredibly the message has not sunk with some of the American public yet that Bush is not only the very worst President they've ever had, but a lying, cheating, deceiving war criminal as well.

The case for war, never good to start with, is looking very very bleak now.

Naturally the Republicans, neo-cons, right wingers and war mongers of this world will embark on another moan about the UN being “biased” and blah blah.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
Even if he dared to do anything about it, the right of veto 'certain' countries have would block any punitive moves.

However this has massive political repercussions. For starters is yet another excuse used by the warmongers that has been removed. The timing is good as well, since incredibly the message has not sunk with some of the American public yet that Bush is not only the very worst President they've ever had, but a lying, cheating, deceiving war criminal as well.

The case for war, never good to start with, is looking very very bleak now.

Naturally the Republicans, neo-cons, right wingers and war mongers of this world will embark on another moan about the UN being “biased” and blah blah.

well said ...and it is very worryong.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
Naturally the Republicans, neo-cons, right wingers and war mongers of this world will embark on another moan about the UN being “biased” and blah blah.

the whole point of the UN is that it's not biased. I'm not sure they'll be much of a reaction to it but it's certainly a serious comment coming from an important bloke.

Former Member

What difference will it make? None.

The UN has a terrible reputation in the US, so its always easy for Bush to dismiss anything they say.

They are 'at war' and need to take globally unpopular measures to protect the US.

Bush is going to win and we're all fucked.

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
Him saying the war is illegal doesn't make it correct at all. It is opinion.

Except that the war was illegal, he's now reiterating it.

Former Member

The law is meaningless unless its enforced, and I dont see anyone with a big enough stick to stand up to the US.

It makes no odds whether or not the war was illegal.

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
How ever, the war has now been done, what do people want? The clock turned bacK?

To bring criminals to justice?

Otherwise it would be akin to someone burgling your house, being caught a year later and saying "what's done is done- what's the point of prosecuting, it's not going to turn the clock back etc".

Lets finish off Iraq

They certainly having a damn good try at that!

and leave them alone. Bringing things like this up, makes the situation worse and the time could eb used to making Iraq safe.

I fear the opposite is true. The longer the Allied troops are allowed to remain in Iraq, the unsafer it becomes.

Former Member

And who is going to enforce bringing the criminals to justice?

Former Member

The UN.

It is perfectly clear by now that the most powerful military machine ever to be assembled is completely incapable of controlling the situation.

The solution is clearly not a military one. Therefore there is no reason whatsoever for the hated, distrusted and unwelcome US troops to remain there.

Former Member

Do you really believe that?

Can you really see that happening? The UN forces out US troops and takes control, then calls for Bush to come to the Hauge and answer war crimes charges?

Former Member

----

Former Member

No sadly I don't see Bush or Blair being sent to The Hague. I'm too cynical to believe justice is blind.

What I believe is that the UN would do a much better job in trying to restore order than the Americans- if only because it is virtually impossible to do a worse job than the Americans are.

Former Member

----

Former Member

Originally posted by stargalaxy
George Bush need not worry about war crimes charges. International legalities mean the USA is not signed up to the International Criminal Court. This topic is highly irrelevant by now. The priority should be rebuilding Iraq, not this petty political point scoring.

I'm impressed.

Though had Serbia signed up to international criminal courts? or the third reich? The leaders and underlings have been brought or are being brought to justice from both countries. Though I admit they were both defeated nations at the time.

Perhaps we should invade america? :chin:

The white tanks and light blue berets of the UN armed forces would be much more approachable than the US forces that are kicking around, it speaks of international community.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
No sadly I don't see Bush or Blair being sent to The Hague. I'm too cynical to believe justice is blind.

What I believe is that the UN would do a much better job in trying to restore order than the Americans- if only because it is virtually impossible to do a worse job than the Americans are.

But then the Hauge isnt exactly doing a great job at the moment is it. Slobadan will draw out the trial pretty much till he's dead.

Lets hope US public opinion goes against the war, that way they might let the UN in.

Former Member

Iraq allies hit out against Annan

Just as Aladdin predicted I beleive...

Former Member

No, the attack was legal. Saddam defied UN resolutions for years, that is more than enough reason to intervene.

Former Member

I wonder if you'd say the same thing if France attacked Israel tomorrow...

Former Member

Kofi means the war is illegal because he hasn’t approved it.
When Bush senior bombed Iraq it was legal, when Clinton bombed Iraq it was legal, when Clinton bombed Yugoslavia it was legal. Because UN and the EU sanctified that.
So if your house is smashed and your relatives are killed with a bomb dropped without corresponding UN resolution you should know- it’s illegal! That is bad.

Former Member

I get what you're trying to say labrat, but you've missed the point (as usual). The point is that if it had been UN approved, it wouldn't have been a unilateral US action, there would probably have been UN troops in there, and the situation wouldn't have been inflamed by hatred of America and idiot responses of the US military.

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
It is an opinion! My opinion is that it wasn't illegal it was a choice.

I hope you realise how ridiculous that sounds. If not I'll point it out.

Murder is not illegal in my opinion, it was my choice to end the life of another person.

It doesn't matter that as a british citizen I have subscribed to the laws of my nation. Nor does it matter that the US as a member of the UN has subscribed to the UN charter, because as I can choose to ignore the laws of the UK, they can choose to ignore the laws of the UN.

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
It is an opinion! My opinion is that it wasn't illegal it was a choice.

Aaaah, you're so right. Kofi Anan, former secretary general of the UN is wrong. Of course, I'm so stupid. :rolleyes:

Former Member

Current secretary general?

Former Member

My mistake.