Oct. 29, 2006. 01:00 AM
<!-- icx_story_begin --><hr>Much has changed in the way the mainstream media deal with the war in Iraq. Most commentators now acknowledge the war is a disaster and will hurt the Republicans badly in the upcoming U.S. midterm elections.
But one thing hasn't changed — the willingness to believe that the motives for war, however misguided, were basically honourable.
So the criticism centres instead on the Bush administration's inept handling of the war.
Canada's own Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal leadership front-runner, tries to slough off his former enthusiastic support for the war by now saying he hadn't "anticipated how incompetent the Americans would be."
But incompetence is a side issue. The real problem is, and always has been, that it is illegal — not to mention immoral — for a country to invade another country, in other words, to wage a war of aggression.
The fact that Iraq is the last unharvested oil bonanza on earth, in an era of increasingly fierce global competition for dwindling oil reserves, only makes U.S. motives all the more suspect.
As the Nuremberg Tribunal concluded after World War II: "War is essentially an evil thing ... To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
If the U.S. had a genuinely open media, there would be a ferocious debate raging about how to deal with the fact that Washington initiated a war of aggression that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands — possibly hundreds of thousands — of Iraqis, and almost 3,000 Americans.
U.S. troops should be removed now.
But one thing hasn't changed — the willingness to believe that the motives for war, however misguided, were basically honourable.
So the criticism centres instead on the Bush administration's inept handling of the war.
Canada's own Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal leadership front-runner, tries to slough off his former enthusiastic support for the war by now saying he hadn't "anticipated how incompetent the Americans would be."
But incompetence is a side issue. The real problem is, and always has been, that it is illegal — not to mention immoral — for a country to invade another country, in other words, to wage a war of aggression.
The fact that Iraq is the last unharvested oil bonanza on earth, in an era of increasingly fierce global competition for dwindling oil reserves, only makes U.S. motives all the more suspect.
As the Nuremberg Tribunal concluded after World War II: "War is essentially an evil thing ... To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
If the U.S. had a genuinely open media, there would be a ferocious debate raging about how to deal with the fact that Washington initiated a war of aggression that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands — possibly hundreds of thousands — of Iraqis, and almost 3,000 Americans.
U.S. troops should be removed now.
the editorial continues:
Â
was the iraq war immoral?
Â
Â
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 9
The Nuremberg Tribunal addressed the EVIL of Hitler and those that tried to absolve themselves of any responsibility, the same thing the Dems/Libs are trying to do now because we did not claim victory in a sound byte convientent for the 6:00 news lead. Mismanaged, that will be debated in war colleges for decades, as we were able to do in 30 days in Afganistan what Russia was unable to accomplish in 7 years. We took Bagdad about the same time-frame with about 250,000 troops and few casualties- Quite remarkable considering the armour and troops that Saddam had banked on.
SO, some bimbo in CANADA wants to dictate our foreign policies?! Why am I not surprised?
My take in an article recently published and a little re-write of the Dem/Lib innocence they want to claim for themselves. (Pilote tried to wash his hands). I guess Darfur is a much more pressing humantarian justification than a leader that murdered millions, ran rape rooms, starved and used CW and BW against his own peoples and Iran while giving the world the finger for 15 years, bribed gov't officials around the world and may well have had a big hand in financing and carrying out the OKC bombing. Yeah, it would be a lot better to invade a sovereign nation in Africa and start killing another bunch of MUSLIMS killing Christians and Jews (infidels - ethnic cleansing). Damn, if only they had a few oil wells it would be worth the Bush-Cos to go in (invade), eh?
The Case For War Against Iraq - Part I: Democrats' Innocence"
If it is illegal for a country to invade another country, who made the law, and who enforces it? The U.N. ??? Oh please, gimme a break.
If it is Bush's fault and because he is an oil man, then why did President Clinton say there needed to be a regime change in Iraq during his Administration?
They never did, all you utopians should take a cold freakin' shower and get some history under you belt, before you complain about how a nation conducts it's relationships with other nations.
Name any other country, in any time period you like--- there isn't one that existed or exists, that can match the glory of the United States of America.
There isn't another than can match our record, for both "good" and "evil." There isn't another that can match our record for both "greed" and "charity."
In short, we are the best of both worlds, both "good" and "evil" --- why ???
Because of the nature of freedom, and free will. When you combine free will with freedom, it is a given bad people will do bad things, it is even a given that sometimes good people will do bad things.
Get used to it, but don't let that given, be construed to mean there has EVER been a "better" country than the USA.
We act in our self interest all the time, legal, illegal, with permission, without permission, whatever--- if it NEEDS TO BE DONE, it gets done, and sometimes, even if it doesn't need to be done, it gets done. Self interest is ALWAYS THE GUIDING LIGHT, and rarely the "legalities" of such self interest and behavior.