The Supreme International Crime: Pre Iraq Invasion Intelligence Was Clear: Saddam Posed No Threat

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

Crossposted from Antemedius

Wikipedia defines a war of aggression as a military conflict waged absent the justification of self-defense. Waging such a war of aggression is a crime under the customary international law. It is generally agreed by scholars in international law that the military actions of the Nazi regime in World War II in its search for so-called “Lebensraum” are characteristic of a war of aggression.

San Diego’s Thomas Jefferson School of Law Professor and president of the National Lawyers Guild Marjorie Cohn in a 2004 Truthout article contextualized a little more bluntly with:

Following the Holocaust, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg called the waging of aggressive war “essentially an evil thing . . . to initiate a war of aggression . . . 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.”

Former UK diplomat Carne Ross, who was Britain’s leading expert on Iraq at the United Nations for four years before the war and had quit his job after giving secret evidence to the UK’s 2004 Butler inquiry into the use of intelligence, is now urging a full inquiry into the legality  of the 2003 US led invasion according to UK newspapers yesterday and this morning.

From BBC News Thursday:

A full public inquiry into the decision to invade Iraq is needed because “a lot of facts still have to come to light”, a former diplomat has told MPs.

Carne Ross said it was “disgraceful” of ministers to “pretend” the Butler and Hutton inquiries told the full story.



“A lot of decision-making, a lot of facts have still to come to light in the run up to this war, which should come to light, which the public deserves to know.”

Asked what this information was, he said he was “happy” to let his evidence to the Butler inquiry “stand as my view”.

The Guardian corroborates the story Friday morning with:

A former diplomat at the centre of events in the run-up to the Iraq war revealed yesterday that the government has a “paper trail” that could reveal new information about the legality of the invasion.

Carne Ross, who was a first secretary at the United Nations in New York for the Foreign Office until 2004, told MPs: “A lot of facts about the run-up to this war have yet to come to light which should come to light and which the public deserves to know.” There were also assessments by the joint intelligence committee which had not been disclosed, Ross told the Commons public administration select committee.

He told the inquiry that the intelligence made it “very clear” that Saddam Hussein did not pose a significant threat to the UK, as was being claimed at the time by ministers, and that tougher enforcement of sanctions could have brought his regime down.

23 comments

Skip to comment form

    • Edger on March 20, 2009 at 4:15 pm
      Author

    Petition Badge
    Get Badge

  1. I recall so vividly when Bush said in reference to Afghanistan, “There’s no targets here — I’m tired of swattin’ flies.”  And, within the same breath nearly, he began speaking about Iraq and the need to go there.  I immediately started questioning the whole thing.  First, Iraq was and still was under our sanctions for some 13 years, their infrastructure was badly worn, the people did not have enough medical supplies, etc.  So, it seemed unlikely that they would be in a position to produce WMD’s, at least to me.  (I also learned that it was we who had sold them WMD’s back in 1990-91, so that’s probably how BushCo were making such a claim, but what they didn’t say is that WMD’s have a shelf life).  And, Saddam, himself, knew, I’m sure, that were he to turn to the left or the right, we’d have been there in a heartbeat.  So, how could he (Saddam) be an immediate threat to us?  I even asked the question on a blog elsewhere “What are we doing?”  I actually got an intelligent answer out of so many responses:  one guy responded, “I think I’ve got a handle on it, it’s the PNAC think tan and their agenda.” and he provided the link.  I immediately read their Statement of Principles and was shocked at their goals.  So, between the knowledge of the PNAC’s goals and the propaganda of Bush, Cheney, etc., I knew it was all being built up — manufactured, to create the sense of urgency in Americans that we were in danger from this man, Saddam Hussein.

    Sadly, the die was cast!  With no lawful justification whatsoever, we invaded Iraq, bombed the hell out of, caused over a million deaths of Iraqi men, women and children, maimed god only knows how many Iraqis, destroyed their homes, their livelihoods, caused them to flee their country to leave in abject poverty in other countries, caused Iraqis to be displaced in their own country, many of whom have no jobs, are homeless and many who are disabled and ill, with little or no relief being shown them.  Some families have become so impoverished that they are “selling” their own children for slave labor, so at least they can be taken care of, since the family cannot care for them.  All of this while we still continue to talk about the unmet benchmarks in Iraq, such as the hydro-carbon oil law not being signed, etc.  The theft of their oil has not yet been ratified.  

    I don’t think or see how any of us can rest easy with the war crimes that have wrought in our names, without doing the right thing — investigating and prosecuting the high-level Bush Administration officials for their war crimes.  

    • TomP on March 20, 2009 at 10:33 pm

    It was a criminal invasion based on lies.  

  2. The Obama Deception.

    Mandatory Lasthorseman endorsed viewing.

    http://video.google.com/videop

Comments have been disabled.