It's Not War It's Genocide
national |
miscellaneous |
news report 
Tuesday February 25, 2003 04:31
by karlof1
Please adopt the word Genocide when describing recent or current events in Iraq.
What was planned and executed during and after the Gulf War was more than war; it was and is Genocide. What Bush et al propose doing is escalate the Genocide; there is no other way to properly describe their plans. So Please, use the term Genocide when talking about the time period from the Gulf War to the current events in Iraq.
By doing so, we will raise the public's awareness of the situation's reality while preparing the ground for the war crimes trials the current and three previous US and UK administrations must be made subject to. Lastly, such a change is the equivalent of a rhetorical smart bomb in the face of the so-called "moral argument" being advanced by Blair, there being absolutely never any moral justification at any time for Genocide; indeed, there is every moral justification for the world's governments and peoples to use any means necessary to ensure that the US and UK cannot escalate their Genocide of the Iraqi people.
Stop the Iraqi Genocide! Indict Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Major, Blair, and their Responsible Ministers for War Crimes! No More Resource Wars!
Please click link for more details.
Comments (10 of 10)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Are you really that thick? Is it all a movie to you? You should read more about the Holocaust, about Rwanda and about other real genocides. Or about the world's only successful genocide when the indiginious Tasmanians were completely exterminated by British and Irish settlers.
What's happenning in Iraq is an unjust resource war. But its not genocide. By throwing this word around you strip it of its meaning.
Shame!
Over 2 million have died since the air blitz that directly targeted infrastructure known by US planners to cause a pandemic, which is only one example. Hans von Sponeck is only one of many officials who know and tell the truth. In essence, your spin is no better than Blair's, which makes you complicit in a crime against humanity, too.
ye wankers
I failed to post this link when I posted my earlier response. Regarding the study of genocide, I'm a student of history whose inquiry is empires, specifically the US Empire; as such, I know quite a lot about what constitutes genocide, and unfortunately what has and is happening in Iraq fits the definition. Is it such a chore to call something by its rightful name?
Do a google search for Tom Nagy and look for a paper he has produced and received a large degree of credibility for, which sets out the case for genocide just in terms of the destruction of the water treatment systems in Iraq. Makes a strong case for genocide.
I could find this: http://www.gwu.edu/~nagy/ but little more; any chance of a direct link?
Sorry, I don't have a link to Tom Nagy's research. Perhaps try a search of the commondreams website archive because I think they published an article about his research. I have found this:
"Denis Halliday is a courtly Irishman who spent 34 years with the UN, latterly as Assistant Secretary-General...
Since I [John Pilger] met Halliday, I have been struck by the principle behind his carefully chosen, uncompromising words. "I had been instructed," he said, "to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide: a deliberate policy that has effectively killed well over a million individuals, children and adults. We all know that the regime - Saddam Hussein - is not paying the price for economic sanctions; on the contrary, he has been strengthened by them. It is the little people who are losing their children or their parents for lack of untreated water. What is clear is that the Security Council is now out of control, for its actions here undermine its own Charter, and the Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention. History will slaughter those responsible."
"Before 1991, Baghdad"s water was as safe as any in the developed world. Today, drawn untreated from the Tigris, it is lethal. Just before Christmas 1999, the Department of Trade and Industry in London restricted the export of vaccines meant to protect Iraqi children against diphtheria and yellow fever."
From:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=3106
Perhaps do a search like: water genocide etc
Here are the links to the original military document which Nagy based his research on and a link to his paper below it.
Good luck. Don't let it ruin your day!
http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/declassdocs/dia/19950901/950901_511rept_91.html
http://www.endiraqsanctions.net/resources/nagy010612.pdf
It does not matter what you call it. The important point to understand is that if the security council backs the U.S the war is then moral, legitimate and justified. This is the position of the Irish Labour Party.
No, not true. The Security Council cannot break the UN Charter to "back" the US. To do so would be tantamount to pushing a selfdestruct button. In the US, Bush is yammering on about the need for the UN to do its duty. The UN's duty in this case is very clear: restrain the US from war and end the genocidal sanctions on Iraq. If the US escalates the genocide, then the UN's duty would be to marshall a coalition of countries to stop US agression and contain the US akin to the way of Iraq. Whether any of this happens remains to be seen.
Indymedia Ireland is a media collective. We are independent volunteer citizen journalists producing and distributing the authentic voices of the people. Indymedia Ireland is an open news project where anyone can post their own news, comment, videos or photos about Ireland or related matters.