Case 1 - George W. Bush

Delegates,

El Salvador has totally disagreed with the decisions made by the ex-President of the United States (George W Bush) when he was in charge of the US. But with the new elections and the mandate of the president Barack Obama, El Salvador has imposed to be in favor of United States in most decisions. Although the United States passed through critical and miserable time with George W Bush, with Obama things are different. Bush began the war within Iraq in January 29th, 2002. In the late 2002 and early 2003, bush urged the United States to enforce Iraqi disarmament mandates, precipitating a diplomatic crisis. In Obama’s first days in Office, Obama issued executive orders and presidential memoranda directing U.S. military to develop plans withdraw troops from Iraq and ordered closing for the Guantanamo Bay detention camp “as soon as practicable and no later than” January 2010. Resuming United States became a better and more civilized country after Obama was elected.

Thanks,
Bruna Milcent

unfortunately, obama presidency has almost no relevancy to this topic becuase the ICC is not trying the United States itself, but the specific actions of its previous president.

ICC U.S.A_Etienne wrote:

China_Rafael wrote:

usa_etienne wrote:

iran, (you might take a note on what im about to teach you here) i cant believe im actually gonna have to teach you about freedom of speech and emotional speeches... but apparently its really badly needed. now as for the freedom of speech... do you have any idea, iran, of how badly u contradicted yourself? well let me tell you right now. freedom of speech means that everyone is free to say whatever they want. i can say whatever i want, and you can say whatever you want. so yes, i didnt indeed tell you that you might want to shut up about that. so yes, i do have a notion of freedom of speech, unlike you do iran... or at least did, because i hope you learned now what freedom of speech is...
and now moving onto the emotional speeches... alright so let me start with what you said about it being the reality. reality in this case would have been stating the fact that families lost relatives. then when you add that mothers were crying and stuff, it becomes an emotional speech taken the fact that you brought emotions into telling the facts (for example crying. isnt crying something emotional?) nobody needed to know that moms are crying and ppl arent sleeping at night because they dont know what was going on down there, to get the point that there have been some loses in american families. i hope u learned now about what emotional speeches are, and what freedom of speech is about too...
and yes i am fully aware of those aerial bombings, and let me remind you of how u were whining about mothers crying and stuff about having lost their kids, well let me tell you, its just so that this doesnt happen more that they did those aerial bombings. its not the americans fault that some areas were full with terrorists not wanting to cooperate with the army, and the army is not trying to get its soldiers killed, other way around, it wants them to live, thats why they conducted aerial bombings. its quite funny actually how u guys can be support some people, and then the other right after when you see that supporting the others failed...
btw what do you inted to say when you say "banished for life"...? that just kinda shows you have no idea what ur talking about so u wanted to throw in a smart word...
and sorry to break it down for you, but if you want me to be able to reply to what you say, it might need to be understandable first...
"explain how WAR AGAINST TERRORIST destroy terror is? It is just a “synonym” for terror I self, just some pretty words that create an illusion that it is for a good cause but it’s not."
all of this is not exactly what i would call understandable... please make an effort in at least making sense with the wrong accusations you try to throw on bush.
btw... im not sure about you but i would much rather be pround of the beautiful strong and big country the united states of america is rather then a country with just sand rocks and scorpions...
euh big words? the only person right here that has been trying to use bigger words was you, iran, with your banished for life, which actually ended up failing pretty badly...
and hey look im sorry to have gotten ur hopes all high and stuff but that quote was a mere response filled with sarcasm towards the quote that the delegate of china put. i put the first quote by einstein that i saw... sort of what china did i guess...
and just to let you know, my position is very accurate, probably more than urs is...
and china, i would apreciate if you didnt have to everytime copy down the whole passage before writting your quote just to eat up space, since we all clearly know that u are talking about the US and what ive said, and no what iran said... so please for the following times just respond to it without copying all of this down again, thank you.
and just a little quesiton, but where is the evidence of that article? oh and btw heres what i found in your article:"
In theory, these vast sums were to be spent in an open, transparent manner solely for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
"
so yeah once again im not sure what ur trying to prove with that article, and quite frankly i would much rather trust a man like George Bush that was elected twice president of the united states of america, than by some radom guy whose name is Andrew Cockburn...
and please reread the quote u put up then, since it clearly stated that it did NOT want independance but PEACEFUL UNIFICATION PROSPECTS.
and euhmmmmmmm "With each terrorist act, thousands of
civilians in Iraq are tortured in the United States in search for these so called terrorists." WOW... can you please do me the favor of reading that over and telling me whats not too right in this sentence? id apreciate it...

once again, with and even bigger heart,
the delegat of the USA.

Dear delegate,

I am sorry if you feel offended for me restating what was posted, but I am not doing this to occupy space, and by the delegate
arguing about that, you are the one trying to occupy space. The quote you posted said by Einstein has a meaning dear delegate, and if you put that in,
then you believe that the USA have indeed made mistakes. Also, dear delegate, since you love to use sarcasm, why didn't
you notice that the IN THEORY was actually filled with sarcasm? Also, dear delegate, the USA indeed wanted
Taiwan to have it's own independence, when sometimes it isn't actually the best for a country. Also dear delegate, that
quote is not what I put, it is something called a forum signature, which is something personal, so why respond towards it
with sarcasm? We are here to discuss our issues, and not talk about other quotes people choose to represent THEMSELVES.
Yes the US army has been torturing innocent civilians in search for the so called "terrorists", in hope that such innocent
civilians would know the whereabouts of a few of those. The USA army violates the human rights of various Iraqi civilians for a
manhunt, which they believe is right. Is it right to punish a family of 25 to find one member of it? Also, the delegate of
China would like to ask the delegate of the United States to refrain from commenting about emotional speech when your
whole post is pretty much an emotional speech.

With heart, (Seems like the Delegate of the USA has a bigger one)
The Delegate of China.

oh no dont worry ralph, i was not at all ofended, and i am not doing this to occupy space either, just like you are not trying to either, right? *cough, cough*
and no... sorry to have gotten you all so excited with that quote, but to me it didnt mean anything, i just looked up on google "quotes by einstein" and picked the first one, since that was what ralph had done i presume.
ok is the delegate of china telling me he is dumb? man, u just put up a quote saying that the U.S does not want at all Taiwan to obtain indepence, and u even use that as "good proof" of the usa being greedy, and now u tell me that the usa wanted taiwans independence? wow... euhm why dont you come and talk to me once u get ur ideas straight... ud do us all a big favor.
and is the delegate of china once again trying to tell me hes dumb? you are just trying to make us believe that ur "forum signature" is not you that put it there, and that u did nothing for it to show up there? "Also dear delegate, that
quote is not what I put". hmm must have been some crazy chinese dude bored out of his mind behind a computer somewhere in china i presume, i mean it happens all the time these days...

well if you want to accuse the usa of doing that, lets start accusing the taliban living in those reigions for having killed over 3000 people for no reason, and having destroyed the twin towers, and four airplanes, and part of the pentagon which if you stop to think about it for a minute, the cost of the little "joke" that the taliban played on the us would amount to maybe over a billion dollars. so if you want to argue that we have violated their human rights, ill just tell you right now, that they did first. and well if you have a family of 25 people (thats a pretty big family right there btw) and they are all armed with ak 47's, and shooting people, and most inportantly american soldiers and the usa is trying to find the most dangerous one of them all, i dont see how that is that bad at all, no...

oh so now all of my speech is "emotional"... hmm thats intersting... can you please read what i wrote before on the definition about emtional speeches, and teach urself from it like a big boy, and then come back to try to accuse me of making all my speeches emotional. thank you. and then if you still think im being "emotional", give me an example of such an accusation, where i was not doing it to be sarcastic replying to someone that had done it.

with an even bigger heart (yes, the delegate of the U.S.A does indeed have a bigger one)
the delegate of the U.S.A - Etienne Pfister.

Dear delegate,

Let's not get personal here. The quote I said I "didn't put" is a forum signature, not something topic related.
Another thing, the quote isn't from somebody from the USA, its from somebody from Taiwan. Also, dear delegate,
what you wrote right now was one big emotional speech with insults. Let's try to get this MUN related, and not
personal, dear delegate, since it seems like you are emotionally being affected by it.

With heart,
The Delegate of China.

China_Rafael wrote:

ICC U.S.A_Etienne wrote:

China_Rafael wrote:

usa_etienne wrote:

iran, (you might take a note on what im about to teach you here) i cant believe im actually gonna have to teach you about freedom of speech and emotional speeches... but apparently its really badly needed. now as for the freedom of speech... do you have any idea, iran, of how badly u contradicted yourself? well let me tell you right now. freedom of speech means that everyone is free to say whatever they want. i can say whatever i want, and you can say whatever you want. so yes, i didnt indeed tell you that you might want to shut up about that. so yes, i do have a notion of freedom of speech, unlike you do iran... or at least did, because i hope you learned now what freedom of speech is...
and now moving onto the emotional speeches... alright so let me start with what you said about it being the reality. reality in this case would have been stating the fact that families lost relatives. then when you add that mothers were crying and stuff, it becomes an emotional speech taken the fact that you brought emotions into telling the facts (for example crying. isnt crying something emotional?) nobody needed to know that moms are crying and ppl arent sleeping at night because they dont know what was going on down there, to get the point that there have been some loses in american families. i hope u learned now about what emotional speeches are, and what freedom of speech is about too...
and yes i am fully aware of those aerial bombings, and let me remind you of how u were whining about mothers crying and stuff about having lost their kids, well let me tell you, its just so that this doesnt happen more that they did those aerial bombings. its not the americans fault that some areas were full with terrorists not wanting to cooperate with the army, and the army is not trying to get its soldiers killed, other way around, it wants them to live, thats why they conducted aerial bombings. its quite funny actually how u guys can be support some people, and then the other right after when you see that supporting the others failed...
btw what do you inted to say when you say "banished for life"...? that just kinda shows you have no idea what ur talking about so u wanted to throw in a smart word...
and sorry to break it down for you, but if you want me to be able to reply to what you say, it might need to be understandable first...
"explain how WAR AGAINST TERRORIST destroy terror is? It is just a “synonym” for terror I self, just some pretty words that create an illusion that it is for a good cause but it’s not."
all of this is not exactly what i would call understandable... please make an effort in at least making sense with the wrong accusations you try to throw on bush.
btw... im not sure about you but i would much rather be pround of the beautiful strong and big country the united states of america is rather then a country with just sand rocks and scorpions...
euh big words? the only person right here that has been trying to use bigger words was you, iran, with your banished for life, which actually ended up failing pretty badly...
and hey look im sorry to have gotten ur hopes all high and stuff but that quote was a mere response filled with sarcasm towards the quote that the delegate of china put. i put the first quote by einstein that i saw... sort of what china did i guess...
and just to let you know, my position is very accurate, probably more than urs is...
and china, i would apreciate if you didnt have to everytime copy down the whole passage before writting your quote just to eat up space, since we all clearly know that u are talking about the US and what ive said, and no what iran said... so please for the following times just respond to it without copying all of this down again, thank you.
and just a little quesiton, but where is the evidence of that article? oh and btw heres what i found in your article:"
In theory, these vast sums were to be spent in an open, transparent manner solely for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
"
so yeah once again im not sure what ur trying to prove with that article, and quite frankly i would much rather trust a man like George Bush that was elected twice president of the united states of america, than by some radom guy whose name is Andrew Cockburn...
and please reread the quote u put up then, since it clearly stated that it did NOT want independance but PEACEFUL UNIFICATION PROSPECTS.
and euhmmmmmmm "With each terrorist act, thousands of
civilians in Iraq are tortured in the United States in search for these so called terrorists." WOW... can you please do me the favor of reading that over and telling me whats not too right in this sentence? id apreciate it...

once again, with and even bigger heart,
the delegat of the USA.

Dear delegate,

I am sorry if you feel offended for me restating what was posted, but I am not doing this to occupy space, and by the delegate
arguing about that, you are the one trying to occupy space. The quote you posted said by Einstein has a meaning dear delegate, and if you put that in,
then you believe that the USA have indeed made mistakes. Also, dear delegate, since you love to use sarcasm, why didn't
you notice that the IN THEORY was actually filled with sarcasm? Also, dear delegate, the USA indeed wanted
Taiwan to have it's own independence, when sometimes it isn't actually the best for a country. Also dear delegate, that
quote is not what I put, it is something called a forum signature, which is something personal, so why respond towards it
with sarcasm? We are here to discuss our issues, and not talk about other quotes people choose to represent THEMSELVES.
Yes the US army has been torturing innocent civilians in search for the so called "terrorists", in hope that such innocent
civilians would know the whereabouts of a few of those. The USA army violates the human rights of various Iraqi civilians for a
manhunt, which they believe is right. Is it right to punish a family of 25 to find one member of it? Also, the delegate of
China would like to ask the delegate of the United States to refrain from commenting about emotional speech when your
whole post is pretty much an emotional speech.

With heart, (Seems like the Delegate of the USA has a bigger one)
The Delegate of China.

oh no dont worry ralph, i was not at all ofended, and i am not doing this to occupy space either, just like you are not trying to either, right? *cough, cough*
and no... sorry to have gotten you all so excited with that quote, but to me it didnt mean anything, i just looked up on google "quotes by einstein" and picked the first one, since that was what ralph had done i presume.
ok is the delegate of china telling me he is dumb? man, u just put up a quote saying that the U.S does not want at all Taiwan to obtain indepence, and u even use that as "good proof" of the usa being greedy, and now u tell me that the usa wanted taiwans independence? wow... euhm why dont you come and talk to me once u get ur ideas straight... ud do us all a big favor.
and is the delegate of china once again trying to tell me hes dumb? you are just trying to make us believe that ur "forum signature" is not you that put it there, and that u did nothing for it to show up there? "Also dear delegate, that
quote is not what I put". hmm must have been some crazy chinese dude bored out of his mind behind a computer somewhere in china i presume, i mean it happens all the time these days...

well if you want to accuse the usa of doing that, lets start accusing the taliban living in those reigions for having killed over 3000 people for no reason, and having destroyed the twin towers, and four airplanes, and part of the pentagon which if you stop to think about it for a minute, the cost of the little "joke" that the taliban played on the us would amount to maybe over a billion dollars. so if you want to argue that we have violated their human rights, ill just tell you right now, that they did first. and well if you have a family of 25 people (thats a pretty big family right there btw) and they are all armed with ak 47's, and shooting people, and most inportantly american soldiers and the usa is trying to find the most dangerous one of them all, i dont see how that is that bad at all, no...

oh so now all of my speech is "emotional"... hmm thats intersting... can you please read what i wrote before on the definition about emtional speeches, and teach urself from it like a big boy, and then come back to try to accuse me of making all my speeches emotional. thank you. and then if you still think im being "emotional", give me an example of such an accusation, where i was not doing it to be sarcastic replying to someone that had done it.

with an even bigger heart (yes, the delegate of the U.S.A does indeed have a bigger one)
the delegate of the U.S.A - Etienne Pfister.

Dear delegate,

Let's not get personal here. The quote I said I "didn't put" is a forum signature, not something topic related.
Another thing, the quote isn't from somebody from the USA, its from somebody from Taiwan. Also, dear delegate,
what you wrote right now was one big emotional speech with insults. Let's try to get this MUN related, and not
personal, dear delegate, since it seems like you are emotionally being affected by it.

With heart,
The Delegate of China.

May the delegate please tell me where i was being emtional, or how this is an emotional speech, and does china not agree that it is simply completly RIDICULOUS
to quote all of what you just quoted?

lets all be formal delegates now.
The delegate of UK feels as though the main points of this arguement should be debated without excessive quoting and innopropriate commentary, and therefore would like to continue on this new note:
delegates, the very terrorist organization that Bush went to the middle east to conquer still thrives and plans and remains a constant threat to the United States, and the UK as well. Mere months ago, an al-qaeda attack was plotted against the United Kingdom that was connected to a plot from the year before when al-Qaeda facilitators attempted to bomb a New York subway.
Just last year in December a Nigerian man acting on Al-Qaeda's instructions set off an explosive device in a failed terrorist attack just as a plane was landing in Detroit (MI).As many of you may know, airport security in The United States is becoming increasingly strict, but obviously such measures must be taken. Though he was not on the no-fly list, his name was in a database indicating that he had significant terrorist connections.
the invasion of the middle east was a neccessary action for not only becuase the UK or US had been threatened but becuase, Germany, Israel, Shiite Iran and had been threatened - Al-Qaeda even threatened to attack the world cup this year!
Stop trying a man who did all he could to try and terminate the threat that looms over several countries and try the real terrorists!

The USA used the war on terror as an excuse to invade Afganistan not Iraq keep to reality. Delegates we question the unlawful invasion iraq and torture not Afghanistan WMDs are the excuse wrong excuse

Delegate what if I said a man was authorizing the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians, what if I said that with the excuse to protect he was murdering, abusing prisoners and responsible for inhuman treatment, wouldn't he as well be considered a criminal? Lets pretend that Bush's goal was to actually terminate terrorrism, would it be effective to do so by abiding to the system he was there to put an end to, it is just like trying to exterminate ants by adding more ants to the bowl, it wouldn't make sense would it?

iraq, if you just said that the whole thing was only to invade afghanistan, you are comepletly wrong. take my word guys, they would have done it. the USA is strong enough and has a strong enough army to do whatever it wants without having to use anything as an "excuse"...

and thank you UK for realizing what bush was really trying to do! finally someone truly understands and opens his/her mind about the reality of things. Guys, you all have no idea of how wrong you are to accuse such a man like George bush for having done “wrong” things! He was just trying to help, but none of you seem to understand it, simply cause u guys don’t want to open up ur minds about it.

iran, let me just tell you one little detail that u might be forgetting... if you want to put on trail George Bush because he is suposedly "responsible for the actions his men in the army of police have comitted" ill just tell you right away that if it were for that, ur president should be being trailed right now... and same for just about every other country in the WORLD. because guys, just to let you know, GB did NOT tell anyone to specifically torture anyone, and he was GIVEN FALSE INFORMATION on the weapons in iraq, (but that is not the whole cause of the war, for the cause would be to also protect the world from crazy dangerous people, reffered to as terrorists), delegates, use ur brain a little. name ONE war that no civilians havent died. go ahead im waiting....

the US has to agree right now with what the UK has said previously... euhm el salvador, you might as well delete your quote for were talking about (let me remind you here quickly) GEORGE BUSH, and the "supposed to be crimes" that he has "committed", which if everyone just takes a second look at it, they are not wrong doings at all, but good ones, and countries are constantly trying to bring the US and gb down well... simply because they are jealous!

oh and btw everyone, id like to add once again, that as soon as the GB was informed of the tortures that were commited by his amry, those officers were immediatly trailed and are now in PRISON. this goes to show that gb was NOT in favor of the torturing that happened, and no im sorry but NO PRESIDENT IN THE WORLD should be brought to court because of what his or her citizens have done, because or else like i said, all the presidents would be in jail by now.

dear delegations:

Quote :

what if I said that with the excuse to protect he was murdering, abusing prisoners and responsible for inhuman treatment, wouldn't he as well be considered a criminal

please delegate! The United States Government has taken seriously the responsibility to protect its country! Of course, when the poor United States of America minds their own business like all the other countries want it to, they are critisized for being a world power sitting back and watching the tragedy ensue, but of course, when they think they've learned to know better and agree, ever so graciously, to help terminate international threats, they are criticized again.
The delegate believes that these countries should make up their minds about how they want the United States of America to participate in the safety of the world and stick to it.
tell us in what war was there were absolutely no civilian casualties. To the delegate, it seems that the Middle East has suffered through a tragic event, but use George W. Bush as their scapegoat becuase they refuse to blame the actual terrorists threatening the world.

"tell us in what war was there were absolutely no civilian casualties. To the delegate, it seems that the Middle East has suffered through a tragic event, but use George W. Bush as their scapegoat becuase they refuse to blame the actual terrorists threatening the world."

that my dear friend from the uk, i believe is very much true. dont you all see that YOUR OWN people are simply killing each other! cant you see that there terrorist attacks actually dont just kill american soldier there, but YOUR OWN people? when a car bomb explodes in the very middle of a square full of people, its not just the people in the car that die, its the ones around! same thing for the rockets that YOUR OWN people launch, that actually also kill civilians! and the guys that think theyre doing the right thing ataching a few kilos of explosives to themselves and then running in the middle of everyone like madmen just to kill 2 or 3 americans when probably twice as many of YOUR OWN people die! and what do you guys say about those people? nothing, you actually just blame it on George Bush!

Quote :

Article 31: Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct:
(d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control.

The excuse of the war on terror would be viable if it had been in an even scale. The damage and destruction caused by the Bush administration by far exceed that which could be caused by the imaginary WMD`s in Iraq. The war in Afganistan is another subject and is unrelated, and the delegate hopes they will remain as such because mixing up the two cases would be inappropriate in the current situation.
The focus here should be rather or not Bush is guilty of the torture and enforced disappearance of civilians and countless other crimes that would fall under his responsibility in respect to article 28.

Delegate of the USA please use common sense torture is not good, being bombed is not good, and being invaded is not good, what were the god deeds done by bush?
Before the invasion of Iraq the number of attacks was much lower and it is because of your vastly superior military power that the people within the territories you occupy find themselves forced to resort to such desperate measures of guerrilla warfare within Iraq, something the CIA did a good job training them for during the Soviet occupation if Afganistan. The other vital fact is that since the US led invasion, the amount of people in the country who believe in Wahhabism has grown and they hope to eliminate Shi‘ite Islam, Judaism, Voodoo, Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism, and Hinduism.
Saddam and his Government were Secular and fought against extremist religions within his borders. The USA invasion crushed the army that help control over territory allowing the countryside after decaying into chaos, to be taken by Extremists, the USA dug his own grave yet again. Saddam was secularising the states and there is no evidence to back the US invasion. The only accusation against Saddam that actually makes sense is the 1988 attack on the Kurds is unjustified and the US led trial was held under questionable circumstances with the defendant rights being seriously violated. there is no solid evidence to prove there was even a genocide, Habeas corpus, stop manufacturing manure. There is no solid base for the invasion of Iraq, No sensible reason for the torture and disappearance of civilians and worst, for the civilian casualties and the instablity brought upon the Country by American policies. It was an act of aggression followed by serious war crimes and violations of human rights, Bush i guilty of serious dereliction of duty or mass murder and torture.

ICC U.S.A_Etienne wrote:

iraq, if you just said that the whole thing was only to invade afghanistan, you are comepletly wrong. take my word guys, they would have done it. the USA is strong enough and has a strong enough army to do whatever it wants without having to use anything as an "excuse"...

This is absurd, the delegate just said that the UNSC, better the UN as a whole is worthless, and subordinated to the USA? The delegate also stated that using force the USA could do whatever they wanted, has the delegate considered this is the reason so many people hate your country? Always the bully and messing around in other peoples business, Delegate Russia and China, Both have the power to oppose the USA and so does Half the nuclear world (countries with Nuclear bombs) but they believe in and international community and peace., hell, Bin Laden has bested you for how many years now? the problem is whenever a country does not kneel you invade or find a way to destabilize it like Cuba, Chile, Iran, Vietnam, Congo Was there any revolution uprising or crazy dictator you forgot to sponsor? Or country you didnt attempt to destroy whe they disobeyed you?

IraqIcc_Chico wrote:

ICC U.S.A_Etienne wrote:

iraq, if you just said that the whole thing was only to invade afghanistan, you are comepletly wrong. take my word guys, they would have done it. the USA is strong enough and has a strong enough army to do whatever it wants without having to use anything as an "excuse"...

This is absurd, the delegate just said that the UNSC, better the UN as a whole is worthless, and subordinated to the USA? The delegate also stated that using force the USA could do whatever they wanted, has the delegate considered this is the reason so many people hate your country? Always the bully and messing around in other peoples business, Delegate Russia and China, Both have the power to oppose the USA and so does Half the nuclear world (countries with Nuclear bombs) but they believe in and international community and peace., hell, Bin Laden has bested you for how many years now? the problem is whenever a country does not kneel you invade or find a way to destabilize it like Cuba, Chile, Iran, Vietnam, Congo Was there any revolution uprising or crazy dictator you forgot to sponsor? Or country you didnt attempt to destroy whe they disobeyed you?

I really dont see how this is absurd... if the USA did it for Iraq, im sure that if it really just wanted Afghanistan, it would have simply invaded Afghanistan without going through Iraq... the USA did what it did because it NEEDED to be done! Iraq was miserable, and you know it. of course now that they did not cooperate, they are maybe even more, but nobody told them not to cooperate, and do suicide bombings in other countries which puts the WORLDS security at risk! and im sorry but George Bush cannot be blamed for having invaded iraq for wrong motives for HE was given FALSE information by the CIA, and thats what he based himself on, since he did not know that it was false. so he should not be the one that gets all the blame. and yes bin laden might have bested us... hiding in freaking holes and caves for the last several years! and well just to give you a little example, the USA does not sponsor crazy dictators for did the USA do that with saddam hussein? i dont think so.

and about all of those crimes that could fall under article 28, like i said, theses could be given to every single president of the world basically, for i am sure that at least 1 person of their military or police has commited crimes. and yes of course its not the president that went to jail, but the person that commited them... and just to let you all know, this is exactly the same that happened in the US. all of the people that have been charged for having comitted torture are right now serving the right amout of time in prison.

Delegate of Iraq please use common sense people blowing themselves up is not good, running airplanes into buildings is not good, having kids walk around with ak 47's is not good, saddam hussein's dictatorship was not good, comitting suicide bombings just about all around the world is NOT GOOD EITHER! NONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT IRAQI PEOPLE DO ARE NOT GOOD! THE US WAS THE ONLY COUNTRY THAT ACTUALLY SAW ALL OF THE BAD THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON AND DECIDED THAT IT COULDNT REMAIN LIKE THIS ANYMORE!

"Before the invasion of Iraq the number of attacks was much lower and it is because of your vastly superior military power that the people within the territories you occupy find themselves forced to resort to such desperate measures of guerrilla warfare within Iraq, something the CIA did a good job training them for during the Soviet occupation if Afganistan. The other vital fact is that since the US led invasion, the amount of people in the country who believe in Wahhabism has grown and they hope to eliminate Shi‘ite Islam, Judaism, Voodoo, Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism, and Hinduism.
Saddam and his Government were Secular and fought against extremist religions within his borders. The USA invasion crushed the army that help control over territory allowing the countryside after decaying into chaos, to be taken by Extremists, the USA dug his own grave yet again. Saddam was secularising the states and there is no evidence to back the US invasion. The only accusation against Saddam that actually makes sense is the 1988 attack on the Kurds is unjustified and the US led trial was held under questionable circumstances with the defendant rights being seriously violated. there is no solid evidence to prove there was even a genocide, Habeas corpus, stop manufacturing manure. There is no solid base for the invasion of Iraq, No sensible reason for the torture and disappearance of civilians and worst, for the civilian casualties and the instablity brought upon the Country by American policies. It was an act of aggression followed by serious war crimes and violations of human rights, Bush i guilty of serious dereliction of duty or mass murder and torture."

before the invasion of iraq, suicide bombings were also common, meaning it was not a stable normal country at all, before the invasion of iraq, saddam hussein had a crazy dictatorship going on killing thousands of people, and before the invasion, your courty is the one to have actually dont an act of agression agains the US with the planes that were flown into buildings and almost into the white house. what bush did was decide to step up against all of this, and make the world a safer place. and no, george bush did not know that there were no weapons in iraq, he was given this information by the CIA and decided his acts upon that false information he was given, which at the time he thought was right. thats all that happened. and please dont try to say that saddam hussein was doing any good to iraq, because he clearly wasnt!

The airplanes had nothin to do with Iraq, the planes were Launched by a Independent Terrorist organization whos leader is Saudi, gets money from Taliban, and is hidden in Afganistan, nothing to do with Iraq, such argument only seeks to divert the attention from the pressing isssue. The fact Iraq was unstable was due to American pushed sanctions. Saddam was secularizing the regime and had support from the US as there is sufficient documentation to prove the American Goverment supplied Saddam with weapons in the past. The fact Saddam was Brutal is a gven, yet this does not serve as excuse for torture as an enforced policy, there were American Prison Camps in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, poland and god knows where else. This is the Problem, your Goverment enforced disappearances and Even after the media exposed the crimes, these prison continued to run. the amount of Iraqi civilians that were detained and tortured is within the thousands, and bush publicly admited it

look here, the airplanes did of course have to do with iraq! that is one of the major places where the taliban is, which is who did the attacks, and they came from iraq. it is not diverting anything. the only person diverting here is you, with guantanamo or and whatever other places you said with i dont even want to hear about cause really i dont care, since they have nothing to do with the subject whatsoever. and no there were not thousands of people tortured, and like ive said before, the peole who have committed such things to iraqi people are right now as we speak in JAIL. they have alraedy been punished for it, and have then taken the blame of course. bush NEVER said to specifically torture the people there. it was done behind his back, and was just as shocked about it when he found out, as the rest of the world. thats why he had those men imprisoned! and again talking about diverting the subject, nobody cares who the US sold weapons to a long time ago. were talking about the invasion of iraq and NOTHING else! but anywyas, yes, maybe the prison continued to run, but there was no more torture done, and the people that did the torturing are in prison themselves. and yes of course bush admited that some people were killed... its a freaking war! what are people gonna do? smack each other? i dont think so... especially when ur people are running around with rocked lauchers and ak 47's shooting at the american soldiers... bush is not trying to hide anything, for he has nothing to hide. it would have been different if he were to know about the torturing, and have tried to hid the facts, but no, since he didnt know about it, and never tried to hide it. he just served justice upon the people that committed those crimes thats all.

“Yeah, we waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. I’d do it again to save lives.” Geaorge W. Bush


Sounds like a Case to me...
Waterboarding is torture

Quote :

Conclusion 1: On February 7, 2002, President George W. Bush made a written determination that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which would have afforded minimum standards for humane treatment, did not apply to al Qaeda or Taliban detainees. Following the President’s determination, techniques such as waterboarding, nudity, and stress positions, used in SERE training to simulate tactics used by enemies that refuse to follow the Geneva Conventions, were authorized for use in interrogations of detainees in U.S. custody.

Strait from the USA congress report on torture... Bush Facilitated torture.
I have in my hands a Report released BY your congress stating YOUR administration facilitated torture a serious breach of article 25 B Bush facilitated torture and enforced disaperance... IF more evidence to this is necessary the delegate is willing to post a Video evidence and other items, also to inlude classified reports about Afganistan and there is possibility of document on Iraq

first of all delegate of iraq, i would like to see the actual quote, and where the delegate got it from, and as for the second thing you posted, maybe he facilitated in the way he said things, but he NEVER ORDERED IT TO BE DONE! it was the CIA that passed laws saying that it was alright to do it, and it is them that told the soldiers to do such things, and its also the CIA that gave the wrong info about the wmds that were supposed to be in iraq. BUSH DID NOT DO THIS.