I Apologize For My Nation

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

I Apologize For My Nation

by Mark L. Harvey

I apologize to the world for the lies of Obama and the Democrat Party and a vast majority of the members of the Republican Party.

I am sorry that Obama promised to repair our nation’s reputation and improve our standing in the world’s eyes and yet have him turn around and offend France and profane the names of the fallen at Normandy and thereby embarrassing Germany.

I am sorry that the nearly five decades of failed Democrat Party economic policies led to the abuse of non monitored federal statute loopholes that allowed foreign born spies, for lack of a better phrase, to use American bank laws that allowed the potential nuclear proliferation of materials to enable Iran to receive products to further Iran’s nuclear program. I apologize that “someone” lied in the NIE report that said Iran had stopped in 2003 and then later on when the damage was done stated that they had made an error.

I am sorry that America, at the dawn of saber rattling of despot nations, will be cutting defense spending as the opposite should be taking place. I am sorry that missile defense systems that have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt they work will go by the wayside in order to appease nation-states lusting for war and territory acquisitions.

I am sorry that the unconstitutional actions of the current federal government is using extortion techniques in direct violation of their own installed and enacted RICO Laws and refusing to accept TARP money pay backs in order to become lords and gods of all economies of the world.

I am sorry that the communist black caucus with a member from Sanford and Son tagging along think that Fidel is just like an old friend and our Troops that ensure their every day safety are considered to be merely stupid people with guns and fight like mad orangutans to not count their votes.

I am sorry that Mr Hopenchange has developed into the singularly most divisive individual to ever disgrace this nation as a whole and has the citizens of this nation on the verge of armed conflict to reinstate our Constitutional Republic.

I am sorry that the slum lord of South Chicago has revealed himself to be the exact model the American Leftinistra claimed President George W Bush was.

I am sorry for the Leftinistra that have blown their chance in less than 90 days to reign in a Marxist State of the former United States.

I am sorry for the international embarrassment Barack Hussein Obama has become on a scale never seen before in any nation at any point in time in the recorded world’s history.

I am sorry for Obama’s fantasy and his affliction with “coke brain” and his inability to communicate on an intellectual level without the sole support of electronic gadgets and a computer programmer at his beckon call.

I am sorry that Obama and his staff of liars and promoters of false proclamations of the myth of global warming to such a degree that they find it necessary to heal the earth by cooling off the atmosphere and planting fake trees to absorb carbon dioxide that real trees need to produce the oxygen we need to survive and to inject once bad for the planet pollution into the atmosphere to reflect solar energy.

I am sorry that Obama and his cabal of idiots, moosetwits and intellectually void staffers, including his wife, don’t know or are incapable of understanding cultures of other nations which causes them to bow to kings, hug queens and violate the customs and protocols of other nations every time they venture out of their asylums.

I am sorry that the wanna-be man called Obama hates the Troops and when 1500 were invited to visit with Obama in Iraq only 600 showed up. I am sorry that he pretends to care and those he pretends to care about send him a message to drop dead. I am sorry for the obvious fraud perpetrated upon our Troops by The One.

I am sorry that Obama said on his campaign that “we will never apologize for our way of life” and then turn around and apologize for this nation we are proud of, causing an avalanche of fellow despot tyrants to demand that he apologize to our enemies. I am sorry that Obama’s character defects are more than he can tolerate.

I am sorry that those promised tax cuts won’t be coming any time soon.

I am sorry that the people of Turkey have been so insulted by Obama that they now hate America more now than they ever had in the past.

I am sorry for America that the nation must suffer its fools for extended periods of time to the extent that our Founding Fathers must be looking down upon their children with utter contempt and dismay.

But, first and foremost, I apologize for our own home-grown Liberals that couldn’t tell you which chapter and verse of the United States Constitution supports even one of their beloved policies, wishes, dreams and desires. I am sorry for the injuries induced into this world by the American Liberal, no matter their political party affiliation, primarily the democrats in drag registered as republicans...
http://www.snooperreport.com/snooper-report/2009/4/9/i-apologize-for-my-nation.h tml

[April15]

Who ever wrote the piece is one sorry ass whiner. Sounds more like sour grapes to me.

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

Who ever wrote the piece is one sorry ass whiner. Sounds more like sour grapes to me. Typical Liberal can't handle the TRUTH

[Little-Acorn]

Who ever wrote the piece is one sorry ass whiner. Sounds more like sour grapes to me.

Translation: I can't refute any of the things said in the post, but I still hate it, so I'll attack the messenger instead and call him names. Maybe I can get somebody to disbelieve him anyway, even though what he said was true.

[sgtdmski]

At least he was a lot more coherent than most of the liberals that complained about the Bush administration. Bush is Hitler was the mantra and when asked how, Bush is Hitler was the response.

dmk

[April15]

Translation: I can't refute any of the things said in the post, but I still hate it, so I'll attack the messenger instead and call him names. Maybe I can get somebody to disbelieve him anyway, even though what he said was true.God you are thick. Plain and simple who ever wrote the piece is a sorry ass whiner. My opinion! Do I hate it? No! Why? Because it is stupid. Will I get anyone to disbelieve the piece? I don't give shit about changing anyones feeble mind. I gave my opinion, understand?!!!!!

[Kathianne]

God you are thick. Plain and simple who ever wrote the piece is a sorry ass whiner. My opinion! Do I hate it? No! Why? Because it is stupid. Will I get anyone to disbelieve the piece? I don't give shit about changing anyones feeble mind. I gave my opinion, understand?!!!!!

And such an authoritative opinion that was. Not. :rolleyes:

[April15]

And such an authoritative opinion that was. Not. :rolleyes:Another feeble mind squeeks.

[Kathianne]

Another feeble mind squeeks.

I'd respond pot & kettle, but I'm not a kettle, then again you don't have the wherewithal to be a pot.

[Silver]

God you are thick. Plain and simple who ever wrote the piece is a sorry ass whiner. My opinion! Do I hate it? No! Why? Because it is stupid. Will I get anyone to disbelieve the piece? I don't give shit about changing anyones feeble mind. I gave my opinion, understand?!!!!!

:lol:Next time ask if anyone gives a shit about your opinion...if perchance someone does, then post it....:boohoo:

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

:lol:Next time ask if anyone gives a shit about your opinion...if perchance someone does, then post it....:boohoo: OUCH thats gotta hurt :laugh2:

[Jeff]

OUCH thats gotta hurt :laugh2:

LMAO, seems like he got slammed didn't it :laugh2::laugh2:

[April15]

:lol:Next time ask if anyone gives a shit about your opinion...if perchance someone does, then post it....:boohoo:You might consider the same operation with your opinions!

[April15]

OUCH thats gotta hurt :laugh2:It's the best I could expect from a person in denial.

[April15]

LMAO, seems like he got slammed didn't it :laugh2::laugh2:Sorry but I have not been slammed by anyone on this forum. If you think I did you have not been paying attention.

[Jeff]

Sorry but I have not been slammed by anyone on this forum. If you think I did you have not been paying attention.

Don't get your panties in a ruffle, it was a joke, your exactly right I was not getting into it, but it did look like ya got slammed and it was funny, sorry didn't mean to ruffle your feathers

[emmett]

I'd respond pot & kettle, but I'm not a kettle, then again you don't have the wherewithal to be a pot.



:lol:

[sgtdmski]

You know, sometimes it amazes me the lack of any intellectual depth of most liberals. When presented with specific claims all they can respond is about the whining coming from conservatives. Well let's take a look at many of the social programs that the liberals have engaged to help this nation. A great point was made in the initial article, where did the Constitutional authority for such programs arise?

More than like it comes from a little clause in Section 8 Article 1 which states:


provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

But that is such a vague clause, with really no teeth. But that is the excuse that liberals use.

During the Bush term over and over again we have heard the cry from the liberals regarding an exit strategy from the War in Iraq. Well, liberals where in the hell is your exit strategy from the War on Poverty, started by Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's. Hell your Messiah hasn't even completed an exit stategy from Iraq, but you know what, it is time that you find an exit strategy for that war you started in the 60's it is long overdue. NEWSFLASH, the spending of 65 trillion dollars on social welfare programs has done little to end it. So obviously spending money is not the answer, so it is time you thought of a new one.

dmk

[April15]

I Apologize For My Nation

by Mark L. Harvey

I apologize to the world for the lies of Obama and the Democrat Party and a vast majority of the members of the Republican Party. Barrack Obama has not lied! The republicans and Bush sure did though.

I am sorry that Obama promised to repair our nation’s reputation and improve our standing in the world’s eyes and yet have him turn around and offend France and profane the names of the fallen at Normandy and thereby embarrassing Germany. He did not do what is claimed

I am sorry that the nearly five decades of failed Democrat Party economic policies led to the abuse of non monitored federal statute loopholes that allowed foreign born spies, for lack of a better phrase, to use American bank laws that allowed the potential nuclear proliferation of materials to enable Iran to receive products to further Iran’s nuclear program. I apologize that “someone” lied in the NIE report that said Iran had stopped in 2003 and then later on when the damage was done stated that they had made an error. Go look at Ronnies complicity in this.

I am sorry that America, at the dawn of saber rattling of despot nations, will be cutting defense spending as the opposite should be taking place. I am sorry that missile defense systems that have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt they work will go by the wayside in order to appease nation-states lusting for war and territory acquisitions. The patriot missles do not work and have been a failure of Ronnies.

I am sorry that the unconstitutional actions of the current federal government is using extortion techniques in direct violation of their own installed and enacted RICO Laws and refusing to accept TARP money pay backs in order to become lords and gods of all economies of the world. And torture is ok?

I am sorry that the communist black caucus with a member from Sanford and Son tagging along think that Fidel is just like an old friend and our Troops that ensure their every day safety are considered to be merely stupid people with guns and fight like mad orangutans to not count their votes. You do realize that after fifty years of embargo the US is the nation hurt most by act.

I am sorry that Mr Hopenchange has developed into the singularly most divisive individual to ever disgrace this nation as a whole and has the citizens of this nation on the verge of armed conflict to reinstate our Constitutional Republic. The title you wish to place on Obama is strictly and solely George Wrong Bush's and those who would rather the fascist regime he represented.If you wish to continue the republic the best thing you and your unholy cohorts could do is work to gether to get this nation out of the mess Bushco put us in!

I am sorry that the slum lord of South Chicago has revealed himself to be the exact model the American Leftinistra claimed President George W Bush was. I presume this is a slam to Barrack. Pretty lame try.

I am sorry for the Leftinistra that have blown their chance in less than 90 days to reign in a Marxist State of the former United States. The liberals are trying to save a nation which is more than the whiny piss ant who wrote this tripe is doing.

I am sorry for the international embarrassment Barack Hussein Obama has become on a scale never seen before in any nation at any point in time in the recorded world’s history. Barrack Obama is bringing back respectability to this nation. Bush and ronnie are the embarrassments.

I am sorry for Obama’s fantasy and his affliction with “coke brain” and his inability to communicate on an intellectual level without the sole support of electronic gadgets and a computer programmer at his beckon call. What this is about I have no idea.

I am sorry that Obama and his staff of liars and promoters of false proclamations of the myth of global warming to such a degree that they find it necessary to heal the earth by cooling off the atmosphere and planting fake trees to absorb carbon dioxide that real trees need to produce the oxygen we need to survive and to inject once bad for the planet pollution into the atmosphere to reflect solar energy. This is utter Bullshit.

I am sorry that Obama and his cabal of idiots, moosetwits and intellectually void staffers, including his wife, don’t know or are incapable of understanding cultures of other nations which causes them to bow to kings, hug queens and violate the customs and protocols of other nations every time they venture out of their asylums. People who are real scare you that much?

I am sorry that the wanna-be man called Obama hates the Troops and when 1500 were invited to visit with Obama in Iraq only 600 showed up. I am sorry that he pretends to care and those he pretends to care about send him a message to drop dead. I am sorry for the obvious fraud perpetrated upon our Troops by The One. It would seem that you are the one who is pretending to know all. Your strawman arguments are silly

I am sorry that Obama said on his campaign that “we will never apologize for our way of life” and then turn around and apologize for this nation we are proud of, causing an avalanche of fellow despot tyrants to demand that he apologize to our enemies. I am sorry that Obama’s character defects are more than he can tolerate.

I am sorry that those promised tax cuts won’t be coming any time soon.

I am sorry that the people of Turkey have been so insulted by Obama that they now hate America more now than they ever had in the past.

I am sorry for America that the nation must suffer its fools for extended periods of time to the extent that our Founding Fathers must be looking down upon their children with utter contempt and dismay.

But, first and foremost, I apologize for our own home-grown Liberals that couldn’t tell you which chapter and verse of the United States Constitution supports even one of their beloved policies, wishes, dreams and desires. I am sorry for the injuries induced into this world by the American Liberal, no matter their political party affiliation, primarily the democrats in drag registered as republicans...
http://www.snooperreport.com/snooper-report/2009/4/9/i-apologize-for-my-nation.h tmlThe cantservatives have reeked more havock on this globe than any liberal could hope too. The real American has no reason to apologize, except for the fool Bush who preceeded Obama. For all these reasons and more

Here are a list of international statutes Bush has violated. His actions constitute criminal behavior punishable under international law.
Quote:
The United Nations Charter

Article 1: The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Article 2, paragraph 4 All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. Article 39 The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Quote:
General Assembly Resolution 3314

On December 14, 1974, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 3314, which defined the crime of aggression. This definition is not binding under international law, but it is often cited in opposition to military actions.
This definition makes a distinction between aggression (which "gives rise to international responsibility") and war of aggression (which is "a crime against international peace"). Acts of aggression are defined as armed invasions or attacks, bombardments, blockades, armed violations of territory, permitting other states to use one's own territory to perpetrate acts of aggression and the employment of armed irregulars or mercenaries to carry out acts of aggression. A war of aggression is a series of acts committed with a sustained intent.The definition's distinction between an act of aggression and a war of aggression make it clear that not every act of aggression would constitute a crime against peace; only war of aggression does. States would nonetheless be held responsible for acts of aggression.
Quote:
Waging a war of aggression is a crime under customary international law and refers to any war waged not out of self-defense or sanctioned by the UN.
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.
-Robert H. Jackson
Quote:
Nuremberg Principles

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI


The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
Quote:
Article 7 of the treaty stated that:


For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What kind of penalty is appropriate for such crimes?

[Kathianne]

Did you mean 'wrecked' instead of 'reeked'? I mean you could mean smelly, but you used it as a verb:

reek   [reek] Show IPA
–noun
1. a strong, unpleasant smell.
2. vapor or steam.
–verb (used without object)
3. to smell strongly and unpleasantly.
4. to be strongly pervaded with something unpleasant or offensive.
5. to give off steam, smoke, etc.
6. to be wet with sweat, blood, etc.

[Kathianne]

The cantservatives have reeked more havock on this globe than any liberal could hope too. The real American has no reason to apologize, except for the fool Bush who preceeded Obama. For all these reasons and more

Here are a list of international statutes Bush has violated. His actions constitute criminal behavior punishable under international law.
Quote:
The United Nations Charter

Article 1: The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Article 2, paragraph 4 All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. Article 39 The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Quote:
General Assembly Resolution 3314

On December 14, 1974, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 3314, which defined the crime of aggression. This definition is not binding under international law, but it is often cited in opposition to military actions.
This definition makes a distinction between aggression (which "gives rise to international responsibility") and war of aggression (which is "a crime against international peace"). Acts of aggression are defined as armed invasions or attacks, bombardments, blockades, armed violations of territory, permitting other states to use one's own territory to perpetrate acts of aggression and the employment of armed irregulars or mercenaries to carry out acts of aggression. A war of aggression is a series of acts committed with a sustained intent.The definition's distinction between an act of aggression and a war of aggression make it clear that not every act of aggression would constitute a crime against peace; only war of aggression does. States would nonetheless be held responsible for acts of aggression.
Quote:
Waging a war of aggression is a crime under customary international law and refers to any war waged not out of self-defense or sanctioned by the UN.
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.
-Robert H. Jackson
Quote:
Nuremberg Principles

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI


The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
Quote:
Article 7 of the treaty stated that:


For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What kind of penalty is appropriate for such crimes?

I mean you are going to list 'the acts' that broke all these, right? You just forgot?

[emmett]

The cantservatives have reeked more havock on this globe than any liberal could hope too. The real American has no reason to apologize, except for the fool Bush who preceeded Obama. For all these reasons and more

Here are a list of international statutes Bush has violated. His actions constitute criminal behavior punishable under international law.
Quote:
The United Nations Charter

Article 1: The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Article 2, paragraph 4 All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. Article 39 The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Quote:
General Assembly Resolution 3314

On December 14, 1974, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 3314, which defined the crime of aggression. This definition is not binding under international law, but it is often cited in opposition to military actions.
This definition makes a distinction between aggression (which "gives rise to international responsibility") and war of aggression (which is "a crime against international peace"). Acts of aggression are defined as armed invasions or attacks, bombardments, blockades, armed violations of territory, permitting other states to use one's own territory to perpetrate acts of aggression and the employment of armed irregulars or mercenaries to carry out acts of aggression. A war of aggression is a series of acts committed with a sustained intent.The definition's distinction between an act of aggression and a war of aggression make it clear that not every act of aggression would constitute a crime against peace; only war of aggression does. States would nonetheless be held responsible for acts of aggression.
Quote:
Waging a war of aggression is a crime under customary international law and refers to any war waged not out of self-defense or sanctioned by the UN.
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.
-Robert H. Jackson
Quote:
Nuremberg Principles

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI


The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
Quote:
Article 7 of the treaty stated that:


For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What kind of penalty is appropriate for such crimes?


Just out of curiosity, which of these Articles were broken by saddam Hussein?

What i meant to say was: Which one of these Articles did Hussein NOT break?

[Kathianne]

Just out of curiosity, which of these Articles were broken by saddam Hussein?

What i meant to say was: Which one of these Articles did Hussein NOT break?

You are a tool, thanks for proving that with this lame post. :lol:

[emmett]

(Emmett drops head in shame)


Geez Kathy, you laughed at me!

[Kathianne]

(Emmett drops head in shame)


Geez Kathy, you laughed at me!

Dang I screwed that up, no? LOL! You KNOW what I meant.

[Kathianne]

(Emmett drops head in shame)


Geez Kathy, you laughed at me!

Dang I screwed that up, no? LOL! You KNOW what I meant.

this one:

http://debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=362802#post362802

[emmett]

Dang I screwed that up, no? LOL! You KNOW what I meant.

this one:

http://debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=362802#post362802




:beer:

[sgtdmski]

The cantservatives have reeked more havock on this globe than any liberal could hope too. The real American has no reason to apologize, except for the fool Bush who preceeded Obama. For all these reasons and more

Here are a list of international statutes Bush has violated. His actions constitute criminal behavior punishable under international law.
Quote:
The United Nations Charter

Article 1: The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Article 2, paragraph 4 All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. Article 39 The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Quote:
General Assembly Resolution 3314

On December 14, 1974, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 3314, which defined the crime of aggression. This definition is not binding under international law, but it is often cited in opposition to military actions.
This definition makes a distinction between aggression (which "gives rise to international responsibility") and war of aggression (which is "a crime against international peace"). Acts of aggression are defined as armed invasions or attacks, bombardments, blockades, armed violations of territory, permitting other states to use one's own territory to perpetrate acts of aggression and the employment of armed irregulars or mercenaries to carry out acts of aggression. A war of aggression is a series of acts committed with a sustained intent.The definition's distinction between an act of aggression and a war of aggression make it clear that not every act of aggression would constitute a crime against peace; only war of aggression does. States would nonetheless be held responsible for acts of aggression.
Quote:
Waging a war of aggression is a crime under customary international law and refers to any war waged not out of self-defense or sanctioned by the UN.
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.
-Robert H. Jackson
Quote:
Nuremberg Principles

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI


The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
Quote:
Article 7 of the treaty stated that:


For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What kind of penalty is appropriate for such crimes?


What a wonderful knowledge of international law. However, let me introduce you to something that you forgot to mention, which for the most part makes your entire argument void. Following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the US with the approval of the UN formed a coalition that ultimately removed Iraq from Kuwait by force and continued into Iraq to ensure that the forces were removed. Upon such time, Iraq and the United States held a peace conference was held in Iraqi territory occupied by the coalition, where a cease fire agreement was negotiated and signed by both sides.

Now a cease fire agreement by definition brings a halt to hostilities, that halt may be indefinite or for a specified period of time only. The U.S. Army’s "The Law of Land Warfare," issued in 1956, defines armistice and the subjects that it should cover. "An armistice (or truce, as it is sometimes called) is the cessation of active hostilities for a period agreed upon by the belligerents. It is not a partial or temporary peace; it is only the suspension of military operations to the extent agreed upon by the parties."

However, any violation of the agreement leads to the right of the aggrieved party to resume hostilities. So let's see, on 18 separate occasions the UN had to make resolutions for Iraq violating the terms of the cease-fire. That means on 18 separate occasions the United States had the right to resume hostitilities.

While some may argue that cease-fires are not binding, they have gained in importance as an international agreement because of the fact that in a majority of cases they have not been followed by a treaty of peace as was formerly the universal custom, but instead remain as the only agreement entered into by the hostile nations bringing hostilities to an end.

How nice of you to forget this little bit of information and history, for it so bolsters your case, but then what does the truth really matter to you, you just wanted to prove your point.

dmk