Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Plantagenet » Thu 14 Jan 2010, 14:45:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'H')i Bas: Now that a Dutch court has ruled that the Iraq War was illegal, are the Dutch going to prosecute the Dutch politicians who sent the Dutch Army to the Iraq War?
The Dutch army didn't participate in the Iraq war, but our government lent it's political support for it, and now a government commission charged with investigating that support has ruled the invasion and thus the support for it was illigal. The current government might fall over this.
That is incorrect. Wikipedia records that the Dutch sent 1,345 troops to Iraq as part of the multinational force that invaded Iraq. Wikipedia says the Dutch troops were deployed in 7/03 and withdrawn from Iraq in 3/05.

Netherlands - An independent contingent of 1,345 troops (including 650 Dutch Marines, three or four Chinook helicopters, a military police unit, a logistics team, a commando squad, a field hospital and Royal Netherlands Air Force AH-64 attack helicopters) was deployed to Iraq in 2003, based in Samawah (Southern Iraq). On June 1, 2004, the Dutch government renewed their stay through 2005. The Algemeen Dagblad reported on October 21, 2004, that the Netherlands would pull its troops out of Iraq in March 2005, which it did, leaving half a dozen liaison officers until late 2005. The Netherlands lost 2 soldiers in separate attacks.

Since the Dutch have found that the Iraq War was "illegal", isn't it a bit hypocritical for the Dutch not to prosecute their own politicians and soldiers as war criminals for engaging in the criminal and illegal war against the Iraqis?
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Bas » Thu 14 Jan 2010, 15:13:17

Indeed Holland was there as an occupational force, though not as an invading force.

It was the ruling of a government sanctioned commission for finding the truth (something they should have in your own country), not a ruling of a court of law.

And I might have skipped over this before, but indeed I hope that everybody involved and responsible for war crimes committed in Iraq (and Afghanistan) will be held to account and this includes politicians and soldiers in the Netherlands. Ofcourse you'll have to agree with me that the most and biggest heads need to roll in the US. But I guess we have to start in Holland and that's what this thread is about.
Bas
 

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Tyler_JC » Thu 14 Jan 2010, 15:34:39

From a geopolitical prospective, this will fracture what is left of the "coalition of the willing". Countries that were on the fence might have a freer hand to pull out their troops. This is definitely something to keep an eye on.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Cloud9 » Thu 14 Jan 2010, 22:04:43

This ruling means nothing until Dutch tanks cross the Rio Grand.
User avatar
Cloud9
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed 26 Jul 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby kmann » Thu 14 Jan 2010, 22:22:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')raq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Since the US started the illegal war, put it in jail. In Holland of course! :razz:
User avatar
kmann
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby dinopello » Fri 15 Jan 2010, 00:50:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kmann', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')raq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules
Since the US started the illegal war, put it in jail. In Holland of course! :razz:
What is the punishment for illegal war ? Did the Council of Dutchman say ?
---
A good mule has a soft kindly look in his eyes which is difficult to describe but easily recognized.
-US Army Corps of Engineers Field Manual, 1917 Edition
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6088
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Urban Village
Top

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Sixstrings » Fri 15 Jan 2010, 13:23:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'I')n a series of damning findings, a seven-member panel in the Netherlands concluded that the war, which was supported by the Dutch government following intelligence from Britain and the US, had not been justified in law.


How convenient for the Dutch to say this now. Where were they when all this was going down, hm?

As if it really takes a panel of experts to figure out what the war was all about, please.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby Bas » Fri 15 Jan 2010, 14:07:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'H')ow convenient for the Dutch to say this now. Where were they when all this was going down, hm? As if it really takes a panel of experts to figure out what the war was all about, please.
most of the parties in Holland were against the war, as were the people who demonstrated against it in big numbers. However the two rightwing parties in power the conservative liberals (this is not an oxymoron in Holland) and Christian democrats voted for the war. In the government we have now though, a coalition between labour and christian democrats, labour forced an inquery into the official support for the war and this is what came out of it, something we already know, but finally it's admitted (well sorta anyway, it's still politics) by one of the parties in power back then that they shouldn't have supported the war.

I hope this explains it a bit, any questions, please shoot.
Bas
 
Top

Re: Iraq war was illegal, Dutch panel rules

Postby dorlomin » Mon 18 Jan 2010, 05:37:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'W')hat is the punishment for illegal war ? Did the Council of Dutchman say ?
Planning and waging wars of agression and crimes against peace are punishable by the death penalty in international courts. This is what those hung at Nuremberg were hung for.
User avatar
dorlomin
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5193
Joined: Sun 05 Aug 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Albright Suggested Plane Be Shot Down To Provoke Iraq War

Postby mattduke » Fri 15 Oct 2010, 18:13:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n the publicity sheet that St. Martin's Press has been sending out to spur interest in General Hugh Shelton's new memoir, Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior, the last highlight is a doozy: "A high-ranking cabinet member suggests intentionally flying an American airplane on a low pass over Baghdad so as to guarantee it will be shot down, thus creating a natural excuse to reltaliate and go to war."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/1 ... 64403.html
User avatar
mattduke
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri 28 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Albright Suggested Plane Be Shot Down To Provoke Iraq Wa

Postby Sixstrings » Sun 17 Oct 2010, 08:57:37

I read most of the article, but didn't see where the quote was attributed to Albright.

Anyhow, doesn't surprise me.. does it surprise you? Surely you're not suggesting the Republicans are peaceniks?
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Iraq war, and today's arab revolutions - "prophecy"

Postby paimei01 » Sat 12 Feb 2011, 17:54:20

Speech from 2003
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry4MwiOV ... ed#at=2163
NWO

Nvm his religion, and his dream of "Islam triumphant over evil", at the end of the video.
http://paimei01.blogspot.com/
One day there will be so many houses, that people will be bored and will go live in tents. "Why are you living in tents ? Are there not enough homes ?" "Yes there are, but we play this Economy game". Now it's "Crisis" time !Too many houses! Yes, we are insane!
paimei01
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue 27 Feb 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Romania

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Plantagenet » Fri 08 Aug 2014, 00:32:58

Here we go again---Obama just started bombing Iraq

Obama bombs Iraq

I especially liked the reason he gave for the US bombing campaign---Obama claims he is protecting Americans from WMDs.

Obama says “when the lives of American citizens are at risk, we will take action"

Would one of the Obama supporters here please explain how the "lives of American citizens are at risk" if we don't bomb Iraq? :roll:

Image
We'll teach you Iraqis not to put the lives of Americans at risk!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Keith_McClary » Fri 08 Aug 2014, 01:14:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'O')bama says “when the lives of American citizens are at risk, we will take action"

... please explain how the "lives of American citizens are at risk" if we don't bomb Iraq? :roll:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')SIS's march has brought a number of disasters that could prompt American intervention. First, there are a number of Americans in Erbil. In June, when ISIS was marching towards Baghdad, the US sent 275 troops to Iraq. Their mission was to evacuate a number of embassy personnel from Baghdad to Erbil, which looked to be safer. A number of American diplomatic and military personnel remain there now.

"U.S. officials said Thursday that defending dozens of American diplomats and military personnel in Erbil would justify strikes aimed at blunting the [ISIS] advance," the Journal reports. The Obama administration does not want another Benghazi.
http://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5980595/iraq-crisis-bombing
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Keith_McClary » Fri 08 Aug 2014, 14:28:21

FAA bans US airline over Iraq due to conflict$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ritish Airways said it was suspending its flights over Iraq and would "keep the situation under review".

The US launched air strikes against IS in Iraq on Thursday. The FAA had previously banned all air travel over Iraq below 30,000 feet on 31 July.

On Saturday, Australian airline Qantas said it had suspended flights over Iraq, following similar actions by German airline Lufthansa, Dubai-based Emirates, Virgin Atlantic and Air France. Flying over conflict areas has come under increasing scrutiny since the crash of MH 17 in Ukraine in July.

Earlier in July, the FAA and other European carriers briefly suspended flights to Israel's Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv after a rocket landed near the airport.
Looking at my globe, there's not much Friendly Skies between Europe and East Asia.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Ferretlover » Fri 08 Aug 2014, 15:00:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'H')ere we go again---Obama just started bombing Iraq
Obama bombs Iraq

Beat me to it, Planty! :P
Airstrikes undertaken as US re-engages in Iraq
http://news.msn.com/world/airstrikes-un ... es-in-iraq
"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Keith_McClary » Mon 11 Aug 2014, 01:23:10

Was there a coup in Iraq? What we know and what we don't know$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Iraqi political system is in crisis. Late Sunday, at 12 am Baghdad time, was the deadline for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to form a new governing coalition in the country's parliament. He missed the deadline, Maliki announced that he would be staying on as prime minister anyway. Right now, Maliki is still acting as the country's leader, but without a majority political coalition, which means it's not clear if he's actually supposed to have that authority.

The facts of what's happening in Baghdad are far from clear at this point. Is this a coup? Are there really troops seizing Baghdad, as has been reported by some outlets? What happens next? Here's a short breakdown of what we know — and don't — about this political crisis in Iraq.
...
Are there troops securing Baghdad for Maliki? Some reports say Iraqi troops are deploying in the streets of Baghdad, but those reports are sketchy at this point. This AFP piece, for instance, says there's "massive security deployment, akin to measures taken in a state of emergency, across the capital Baghdad." That may or may not be true; AFP cites an Iraqi policeman and an "official at the Interior ministry." There's very little evidence for some of these claims, including the theory that Maliki has surrounded Masum's office with tanks.
...
Will the US side against Maliki, or even help push him out? The US is a big player in Iraqi politics, often acting as a formal mediator in disputes. The US is also now helping Iraq against ISIS, so the Americans could play a big role in this crisis. The Obama administration has been unhappy with Maliki for a while, whom they see as creating some of the conditions that allowed ISIS to take over half of the country, but it's not yet clear what they'll do in response to this crisis. They could back Maliki (that's unlikely), could try to mediate to form a new government, could quietly ask Maliki to leave, or might even publicly demand it. The closest we've seen yet to a formal position is a tweet from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ully support President of #Iraq Fuad Masum as guarantor of the Constitution and a PM nominee who can build a national consensus.

The US bombing its own guns perfectly sums up America’s total failure in Iraq$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen President Obama announced US airstrikes in Iraq, most observers understood that the US would be bombing members of ISIS. What many did not know was that, in a twist of such bitterly symbolic irony that it could only occur in the Middle East, the US would also be bombing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of American military equipment.

Here's why: in the decade since the 2003 US-led Iraq invasion, the US has spent a fortune training and arming the Iraqi army in the hopes of readying it to secure the country once America left. That meant arming the Iraqi army with high-tech and extremely expensive American-made guns, tanks, jeeps, artillery, and more.
But the Iraqi army has been largely a failure. When ISIS invaded northern Iraq from Syria in June, the Iraqi forces deserted or retreated en masse. Many of them abandoned their American equipment. ISIS scooped it up themselves and are now using it to rampage across Iraq, seizing whole cities, terrorizing minorities, and finally pushing into even once-secure Kurdish territory. All with shiny American military equipment.

So the US air strikes against ISIS are in part to destroy US military equipment, such as the artillery ISIS has been using against Kurdish forces.

The absurdity runs deep: America is using American military equipment to bomb other pieces of American military equipment halfway around the world. The reason the American military equipment got there in the first place was because, in 2003, the US had to use its military to rebuild the Iraqi army, which it just finished destroying with the American military. The American weapons the US gave the Iraqi army totally failed at making Iraq secure and have become tools of terror used by an offshoot of al-Qaeda to terrorize the Iraqis that the US supposedly liberated a decade ago. And so now the US has to use American weaponry to destroy the American weaponry it gave Iraqis to make Iraqis safer, in order to make Iraqis safer.

It keeps going: the US is intervening on behalf of Iraqi Kurds, our ally, because their military has old Russian-made weapons, whereas ISIS, which is America's enemy, has higher-quality American weapons. "[Kurdish forces] are literally outgunned by an ISIS that is fighting with hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. military equipment seized from the Iraqi Army who abandoned it," Ali Khedery, a former American official in Iraq, told the New York Times.

More: One reason that ISIS has been so successful at conquering northern Iraq is that it has a huge base of operations in Syria, where it had exploited the civil war to overtake huge swathes of Syrian territory. One reason that ISIS was so successful in Syria is that the US refused to arm moderate Syrian rebels, for fear that the weapons would fall into ISIS's hands. So that made it easier for ISIS to overpower the under-funded moderate rebels, and now ISIS has seized, in Iraq, much better versions of the weapons that we were so worried they might acquire in Syria. So now we're bombing the guns that we didn't mean to give ISIS because we didn't give guns to their enemies because then ISIS might get guns.

It's not just ironic; it's a symbol of how disastrous the last 15 years of US Iraq policy have been, how circuitous and self-perpetuating the violence, that we are now bombing our own guns. Welcome to American grand strategy in the Middle East.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Keith_McClary » Mon 11 Aug 2014, 16:08:34

US installs new Iraq PM Haider Abadi$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')aliki has not recognized Abadi's claim to power. He said Massoum does not have to authority to make the nomination and has appealed the matter to the country's highest court
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby dissident » Mon 11 Aug 2014, 22:26:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '[')url=http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-biden-iraq-20140811-story.html]US installs new Iraq PM Haider Abadi[/url]$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')aliki has not recognized Abadi's claim to power. He said Massoum does not have to authority to make the nomination and has appealed the matter to the country's highest court


Not surprising that the USA would leave a Latin America style junta military in Iraq. They even sent over Negroponte to oversee the implementation of their anti-insurgency strategy and likely make sure the Iraqi army is staffed with US loyalists. Now we see the USA calling in one of its cards.

Maliki threatened to ditch Washington. His now a marked man, like Yanukovich. I hope Maliki wins and purges totally the army of its US quislings.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

Postby Keith_McClary » Sun 17 Aug 2014, 00:48:09

Iraq voices anger as US air force defends Irbil – but not Baghdad$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')aqe confirmed that Iranian air force pilots were active above the skies of Iraq. "I have seen with my own eyes that the Iranians have brought Sukhoi planes," he said. "Everything in that unit is Iranian including the pilot and the mechanics. They are in Rasheed base, a huge base in south of Baghdad … the Iranians make barrel bombs and then use Antonov and Huey planes to drop them in Sunni areas. Some Iranian pilots have been shot down.

"When we go to bomb a place, the ground troops don't accompany us. We bomb a place and kill a few, then Isis disperses, but they regroup later."

The pilot said that five helicopters had been brought down by the militants, while another seven planes were put to the torch on an airfield in Tikrit.

As the war of attrition with Isis steadily tips in the militants' favour, resentment is growing among influential Iraqis. "The American policy is shameful," said Hassan al-Fayath, the dean of al-Nahrain University in Baghdad. "The Americans always say they are the leaders in fighting terrorism but they didn't lift a finger when Isis was taking parts of Iraq. The only time the Americans got involved was when they found it started threatening their interests by getting closer to the oil fields and to Irbil.

"Isis succeeded in securing Iraqi oil and now they have the resources to recruit more fighters and buy weapons. Why did everyone let them go that far and not intervene earlier?"

Asked whether US jets will return to the skies over Baghdad, he said: "Obama will launch more strikes to save the oil and his Kurdish friends."
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Previous

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron