Some older cases of Crimes Against Humanity that ought not to be forgotten:

The Spaniards near total annihilation of the Native American tribes of Central and South America. We know that the tally in death was over 20 million, but I don't know of a dependable source for anything exact.

The Mongols killed at least 10 million people in their conquests, but that number represented a much much larger percentage of the population of the world at that time.

Turkey's very own holocaust, massacring the Armenian people during World War I. The number dead was somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 or 5 million. What's worse, Hitler saw the world completely ignore that particular holocaust/genocide and figured that nobody would notice his own.

TBA-PAKI, you offer an interesting series of points there and its an interesting perspective, certainly. I think that the USA and Iraq doesn't exactly qualify as the type of warcrimes as most of us think of them: Intentionally wiping out or murdering people, with the sole purpose of erasing their very existance. Lets be clear though. The sanctions were not imposed by the US. They were imposed by the UN. The US was the only one enforcing them for the most part, but if there is any guilt, the entire UN shares it. Besides that, Saddam was 100% capable of having the sanctions lifted, but he was too much the arrogant bastard to come clean. All he needed to do was comply with what he had already agreed to do and allow for completely unhindered inspections, etc. He refused. The deaths of his people are more on his head than anyone else's. Also, how much death in Iraq was malicious and intentional on the part of the USA? Compare that to the exploits of Ghengis Khan and those who came after him: If a city refused to surrender, the Mongols beseiged, eventually took the city, killed every living thing in it (men, women, children, and even animals often times), razed the city to the ground and left. A couple days later, they returned and killed anyone who had managed to hide or escape, catching them after they returned to the city. Now tell me this, has the United States every done anything even remotely like that in Iraq?

Japan had murdered 30 million Chinese and 1 million Koreans. And millions of other races. The USA actually helped with the coverup of the Holocaust done by the Japs so they could have Japan as an ally against the Soviet Union.

USA has also done a war crime of attempting to mask over 32 million killed the Japanese.

Its a shame that not even Japan's own people know about this, only a few by the words of WWII veterans.

Japan's continual denial and refusal to apologize is hurting the relationship between other asian countries.
People won't so easily forget the massacreing of over 32 million people.

Not much of the world knows or cares about this, unless it happens to them.

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

TBA-PAKI, you offer an interesting series of points there and its an interesting perspective, certainly. I think that the USA and Iraq doesn't exactly qualify as the type of warcrimes as most of us think of them: Intentionally wiping out or murdering people, with the sole purpose of erasing their very existance. Lets be clear though. The sanctions were not imposed by the US. They were imposed by the UN. The US was the only one enforcing them for the most part, but if there is any guilt, the entire UN shares it. Besides that, Saddam was 100% capable of having the sanctions lifted, but he was too much the arrogant bastard to come clean. All he needed to do was comply with what he had already agreed to do and allow for completely unhindered inspections, etc. He refused. The deaths of his people are more on his head than anyone else's. Also, how much death in Iraq was malicious and intentional on the part of the USA? Compare that to the exploits of Ghengis Khan and those who came after him: If a city refused to surrender, the Mongols beseiged, eventually took the city, killed every living thing in it (men, women, children, and even animals often times), razed the city to the ground and left. A couple days later, they returned and killed anyone who had managed to hide or escape, catching them after they returned to the city. Now tell me this, has the United States every done anything even remotely like that in Iraq?

Your points are valid in some context too.

But the problem is that IRAQ (an entire nation) is totally crippled by the heavy sanctions and now the recent war has brought more pain to Iraqi people then making things better for them. We can blame insurgents but let me tell you that these insurgents only want US to leave and thats it.

Being part of a civilized world, US itself has voilated UN charter and commited a major war-crime by capturing and enforcing its right on an already crippled nation or VICTIM country.

Saddam was at least keeping the country in order but US intervention under false pretext that Iraq has deadly weapons brought more pain to that nation. People are dying over there on daily basis.

Just imagine the entire scenario that what if US had to face the same fate then what you ordinary Americans and soldiers would do in such circumstances?

We cannot take things for granted and make decisions solely based on our ideologies and neglect other prespectives.

Iraqi citizens first suffered from Saddam and since Gulf War, they suffered from the clutches of strict sanctions for 13 years by UN-US agenda and now since 2 years, directly from US.

Just imagine the period of 15 years of pain and still it is not over.

About Saddam's stupidity, The worst he did was to shoot down a US predator drone and did not allowed inspections in his palaces. But that might be for privacy reasons. I don't have much words for his foolishness though.

But this war had made both Saddam and Bush culprits.

For Mongols: Lets not forget that they were barbarians with no regard for humanity. Contrary to this US is part of a civilized world and its ambitions are bound to be better.

But even US has commited some serious crimes in IRAQ.

In the battle of Fallujah, US forces used chemical weapons against insurgents.

The horrible abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu-Gharab prison will remain fresh for very long times in minds of many people. Despite that US is signatory to Geneva Conventions.

Many cities in IRAQ including Najaf has been razed to the ground despite of the knowledge that Iraqi people want freedom and not US intervention in their affairs and even Shia people revolted against them. But US media continues to paint the image that Iraqis are content with US intervention.

I tell you one thing that many insurgents in IRAQ are ordinary citizens fighting for freedom.

We can blame insurgents but let me tell you that these insurgents only want US to leave and thats it.

Two things come to mind when I read this.

One, is bull . If this statement were true they would NOT be attacking other Iraqis. Full stop.

Two, are you an insurgent or do you personally know insurgents in order to make this claim with a sense of authority as you imply with the phrase "let me tell you"??

US itself has voilated Geneva conventions and commited a major war-crime by capturing and enforcing its right on an already crippled nation or VICTIM country.

Attacking another country is NOT a "war crime". It might violate international law but it is not a war crime. War crimes include many things such as genocide and purposeful targetting of civilians. Do you have specific charges to level against the US and coalition forces and if so may I be so bold as to ask for proof that we can all verify?

Saddam was at least keeping the country in order but US intervention under false pretext that Iraq has deadly weapons brought more pain to that nation. People are dying over there on daily basis.

Yes, Hitler and Stalin also did very good jobs of maintaining order in their countries as well. As for your last sentence here, its a war zone, people die in a war. Were it not for the insurgents continued actions against coalition forces and Iraqis there would be no war right now regardless of who started it. Its continued action is the result of TWO parties not ONE.

We cannot take things for granted and make decisions solely based on our ideologies and neglect other prespectives.

What praytell are you on about with this? What was taken for granted?? Decisions are made on ideology and nothing else day in and day out. Its called free will and its something most people exercise. Thank you for trying to dictate to everyone else how things should be done in the "World According to Paki" but no thanks.

Iraqi citizens first suffered from Saddam and since Gulf War, they suffered from the clutches of strict sanctions for 13 years by UN-US agenda and now since 2 years, directly from US.

The first Gulf War was a direct result of open aggression by Saddam against his neighbour. The resulting war to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait was sanctioned and approved by ALL Islamic middle-eastern countries and so were the resulting sanctions to keep him in check. The suffering of the Iraqi people is correctly blamed at the feet of the their leader NOT the US.

Just imagine the period of 15 years of pain and still it is not over.

Your compassion is so moving. Shall we pause together my friend and consider the plight of the Kurdish minority in Turkey and their suffering for the last oh, lets just limit it to the last 40 years just for simplicity's sake. Shall we? Or is your compassion only extended to those who serve your underlying agenda of hate?

The worst he did was to shoot down a US predator drone and did not allowed inspections in his palaces. But that might be for privacy reasons. I don't have much words for his foolishness though.

Indeed the scope of your hatred seems rivalled only by the powers of your amnesia. Violating sanctions. Threatening to start a new war. Expelling inspectors. Torturing and murdering Iraqis and Kurds. My you have a strange value system by which you measure the mettle of a leader's actions.

In the battle of Fallujah, US forces used chemical weapons against insurgents.

White phosphorous is not a chemical weapon. If it were a chemical weapon then every soldier who has ever fired a weapon with tracer rounds in it has used chemical weapons. Sarin, mustard gas and the like ARE chemical weapons.

The horrible abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu-Gharab prison will remain fresh for very long times in minds of many people. Despite that US is signatory to Geneva Conventions.

Aye and I am sure the Iraqis with better memories will recall far numerous and far worse crimes of abuse under your hero Saddam's reign.

Many cities in IRAQ including Najaf has been razed to the ground despite of the knowledge that Iraqi people want freedom and not US intervention in their affairs and even Shia people revolted against them. But US media continues to paint the image that Iraqis are content with US intervention.

As was Cologne, Dresden, Berlin and numerous other cities during World War II alone. This too shall pass and people will rebuild once peace comes just as people have done for thousands of years. Get over it.

I tell you one thing that many insurgents in IRAQ are ordinary citizens fighting for freedom.

Again I ask, are you an insurgent or do you have special knowledge of the Iraqi insurgents that allows you to make such claims of authority??

Originally Posted by bulldogg

White phosphorous is not a chemical weapon. If it were a chemical weapon then every soldier who has ever fired a weapon with tracer rounds in it has used chemical weapons. Sarin, mustard gas and the like ARE chemical weapons.

White phosphorous is a chemical, how come it cannot be classified as a chemical weapon when used in war?

Personally I see it as a weapon with a chemical component. Just a quick thought.

Definition of "Chemical Weapons"

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start...ssary_main.htm

Modern chemical weapons tend to focus on agents with high killing power, meaning it requires small amounts of a chemical agent to kill large numbers of people.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start...C/cw_glsry.htm

Toxic chemicals and their precursors, munitions and devices, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals, and equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of those munitions and devices.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start...emical_weapons

Chemical warfare is warfare (and associated military operations) using the toxic properties of chemical substances to kill, injure or incapacitate the enemy

Definition of "White phosphorous"

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start...stwar_taba.htm

White phosphorus is a form of phosphorus which creates spectacular bursts when used in artillery shells and is very damaging to the skin since it burns on exposure to oxygen.

As you can see WP does not fit the internationally accepted definitions of what a chemical weapon is.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Two things come to mind when I read this.

One, is bull . If this statement were true they would NOT be attacking other Iraqis. Full stop.

Two, are you an insurgent or do you personally know insurgents in order to make this claim with a sense of authority as you imply with the phrase "let me tell you"??

People who are fighting over there want US forces out of the country and they are putting pressure on those Iraqis who are co-operating with US forces. They already warned Iraqi people to not to co-operate with US forces.

And what about when ordinary Iraqi civilians protest against US forces and they get shot by BFV's and Abrams. Have you forgot those images?

Not to forget the targeting and shooting on Al-Jazeera reporters. Is this free will?

Remember your own statement now that this is war and people are bound to get hurt. So both the insurgents and your Coalition Troops are to be blamed or should I say, involved in war-crimes?

Some insurgents are fighting for there agenda but many of them are ordinary or former Iraqi soldiers who want US to move out. I read this from lots of Media Sources.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Attacking another country is NOT a "war crime". It might violate international law but it is not a war crime. War crimes include many things such as genocide and purposeful targetting of civilians. Do you have specific charges to level against the US and coalition forces and if so may I be so bold as to ask for proof that we can all verify?

It might not be a war-crime, in case if a nation is a major threat to your security but IRAQ was not a threat to US. It wasn't even involved in 9/11 attacks on US soil.

All Mr. Bush wanted was to remove Saddam from power (for no valid reasons) and to do this he bluffed with UN using false reports of CIA that IRAQ was developing WMD's. He used this reason to portray that Saddam will kill many Americans in the near future if left alone, although he was not capable to do so.

This is more like a personal enemity and not for a good reason. Also OIL was one of driving forces. His arrogance and poor judgement had brought terrible consequences for Iraqi people. Not even UN but some of his European Allies forbade him to make such a move and he did not listened.

I have met some people who went to IRAQ for business and they were surprised by the Anti-US sentiments over there.

And here you come and tell me that it was just a move against International LAW. Any ordinary war is a move against International Law but a war fought for personal enemity is indeed a War-Crime.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Yes, Hitler and Stalin also did very good jobs of maintaining order in their countries as well. As for your last sentence here, its a war zone, people die in a war. Were it not for the insurgents continued actions against coalition forces and Iraqis there would be no war right now regardless of who started it. Its continued action is the result of TWO parties not ONE

Hitler and Stalin are one of the worst in my books, so why quote them?

Seriously, do you expect to march in a nation under pretext of freedom ny making false claims and then expect people to bow before your cause. You are seriously wrong then my mate!

Iraqi Insurgency is Anti-US and against its puppet Iraqi regime. Although some Iraqi black-sheeps or foriegners might be looking forward to their own agenda.

And bringing more pain to already Iraqi patients (I might call them) is worst form of ignorance you can think of. War brought more pain and no relief to already suffering Iraqis, so why resources are being wasted on such a foolish endeavour?

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

What praytell are you on about with this? What was taken for granted?? Decisions are made on ideology and nothing else day in and day out. Its called free will and its something most people exercise. Thank you for trying to dictate to everyone else how things should be done in the "World According to Paki" but no thanks.

Yeah! deciding fate of others is an act of Free Will for you, even if that decision brings pain to somebody or an entire nation.

And defying UN Charter is one act of Free Will. We only a need a couple of more nations like this to annihilate peace from the region in the garb of Free Will.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

The first Gulf War was a direct result of open aggression by Saddam against his neighbour. The resulting war to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait was sanctioned and approved by ALL Islamic middle-eastern countries and so were the resulting sanctions to keep him in check. The suffering of the Iraqi people is correctly blamed at the feet of the their leader NOT the US.

I know the reasons for first Gulf War and if you were reading my posts properly then you would not have bothered with this.

This was my point in one of posts about 1st Gulf War in this thread:

Then in 1990, when IRAQ invaded Kuwait, US tone suddenly changed but still I feel that 1991 GULF WAR was justified as Saddam had no right to take-over any independent nation.

I support US action on this one but after that war US imposed very strong sanctions on that crippled nation and these sanctions continued for 13 years which resulted in deaths of 2 million Iraqi children. An entire Iraqi race was destroyed for enemity with Saddam, why?

Try to read my posts clearly.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Your compassion is so moving. Shall we pause together my friend and consider the plight of the Kurdish minority in Turkey and their suffering for the last oh, lets just limit it to the last 40 years just for simplicity's sake. Shall we? Or is your compassion only extended to those who serve your underlying agenda of hate?

So does yours.

And to bring peace to Kurdish, we needed to slaughter large number of Sunnis. Game over. No solution.

If you knew some more about Kurdish then you would know that they were looking forward to independant nation which meant splitting up of IRAQ and even Turkish govt is also keeping Kurdish at bay for this very reason. What do you think of this then?

Even after 1991, Kurdish revolted against Saddam and they paid a dearing price for that very reason. So why did they revolted in the first place if they knew that Saddam was a mad man and he could lower himself to any state to complete his agenda?

Try to find this reason.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Indeed the scope of your hatred seems rivalled only by the powers of your amnesia. Violating sanctions. Threatening to start a new war. Expelling inspectors. Torturing and murdering Iraqis and Kurds. My you have a strange value system by which you measure the mettle of a leader's actions.

And your allegience to US propaganda is also speaking volumes.

Enforcing heavy Sanctions that costed lives of many children. Who enforced them?

Ans: US under UN

Threatening to start a new war?

Ans: I am amazed. Was Iraq capable of doing that after Gulf War? I don't think so!

And who attacked in the end?

Ans: US did.

Torturing and Murdering Iraqis?

First it was Saddam and sadly US also fell for his cause by doing the same thing.

My you have a strange value system by which you measure the mettle of a leader's actions.

And you have strange value to ignore Bush arrogance.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

White phosphorous is not a chemical weapon. If it were a chemical weapon then every soldier who has ever fired a weapon with tracer rounds in it has used chemical weapons. Sarin, mustard gas and the like ARE chemical weapons.

Agreed Sir!

No comments here.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Aye and I am sure the Iraqis with better memories will recall far numerous and far worse crimes of abuse under your hero Saddam's reign.

Yeah! they will remember both Saddam and Bush in harsh terms.

By the way, Saddam is not my hero.

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

As was Cologne, Dresden, Berlin and numerous other cities during World War II alone. This too shall pass and people will rebuild once peace comes just as people have done for thousands of years. Get over it.

Yes! I agree!

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

Again I ask, are you an insurgent or do you have special knowledge of the Iraqi insurgents that allows you to make such claims of authority??

No! visit IRAQ for better answers.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Bulldogg

As you can see WP does not fit the internationally accepted definitions of what a chemical weapon is.

That is interesting reading but there are more to this than that - however I rest my case as this is not the right thread for a WP discussion. Thanks for the info mate.

Paki, you've caved in so bad I actually feel guilty and will quit while you're still able to look in the mirror. By all means continue to tilt at windmills but owing to the lack of coherence and intelligence in your response I will no longer respond to your posts... you have now joined my "ignore" list. Cheers.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Paki, you've caved in so bad I actually feel guilty and will quit while you're still able to look in the mirror. By all means continue to tilt at windmills but owing to the lack of coherence and intelligence in your response I will no longer respond to your posts... you have now joined my "ignore" list. Cheers.

I don't feel guilty as I stand by my points, and I never mean't to make you feel that way.

And if things went wrong, then I am sorry and you are not in my ignorance list. Respond or not, thats your choice.

Cheers!