ANSWERing Bush´s Big Myths About Iraq

Yellow Cosmic Star


12:23 AM

Myth # 1

The United States has the right to wage preemptive war against Iraq

Preemptive war is war of aggression. Under international law, a preemptive

war may be justified as an act of self-defense only where there exists a

genuine and imminent threat of physical attack. Bush´s preemptive war

against Iraq doesn´t even purport to preempt a physical attack. It purports

to preempt a threat that is neither issued nor posed. Iraq is not issuing

threats of attack against the United States. It is only the United States

that threatens war. There has been no evidence that Iraq is capable of an

attack on the U.S., let alone possessing the intention of carrying out such

an attack.

Myth # 2

The U.N. Security Council can lawfully authorize preemptive war

The United Nations Security Council cannot authorize a potential nuclear

U.S. first strike and war of aggression that violates the U.N. Charter,

international law and the law prohibiting war crimes, crimes against the

peace and crimes against humanity. The U.N. Charter - which creates the

Security Council and which grants the Council its authority - requires the

"Security Council to act in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of

the United Nations." (Article 24)

The U.N. Charter requires international disputes or situations that might

lead to a breach of peace to be resolved by peaceful means. (Article 1 and

Chapter VI) In other words, a nation may not wage war based on the claim

that it seeks to prevent war. A nation may use force unilaterally in

self-defense only "if an armed attack occurs" against it. (Article 51)

Myth # 3

The United States Congress can lawfully authorize preemptive war against Iraq

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution establishes that ratified treaties,

such as the U.N. Charter, are the "supreme law of the land." The U.N.

Charter has been ratified by the United States, and the Congress may not

take actions - including wars of aggression - in violation of the Charter.

Wars of aggression, and even the making of the threat of a war of

aggression, violates the international humanitarian law to which all

nations are bound. Neither Congress nor the President has the right to

engage the U.S. in a war of aggression and any vote of endorsement, far

from legalizing or legitimizing global war plans, serves only as

ratification of war crimes.

Myth # 4

The U.S. government intends to "liberate" the Iraqi people

The October 11, 2002, New York Times revealed the true plans of the United

States: "The White House is developing a detailed plan, modeled on the

postwar occupation of Japan, to install an American-led military government

in Iraq if the United States topples Saddam Hussein, senior administration

officials said today.Š In the initial phase, Iraq would be governed by an

American military commander - perhaps Gen. Tommy R. Franks, commander of

the United States forces in the Persian Gulf, or one of his subordinates -

who would assume the role that Gen. Douglas MacArthur served in Japan after

its surrender in 1945." ("U.S. has a plan to occupy Iraq, officials


The true intention of the U.S. government is to recolonize Iraq. Prior to

the 1960s, U.S. corporations made 50 percent of their foreign profits from

investments in oil from this region. The Bush administration wants Iraq to

denationalize its oil wealth - 10% of the world´s supply. This war is an

attempt to reconquer Iraq and all of its natural resources. The Bush

administration wants to reshuffle the deck in the Middle East and undo all

of the achievements of the national liberation movements from the last

sixty years. They want to eliminate independence for all countries in the

region and assert their domination and control - not in the interest of the

vast majority of people - but for access to oil.

Myth # 5

Iraq is a military threat to the world

There is no record to support this claim. During the Gulf War of 1991,

while the United States bombed Iraq with a barrage that included 110,000

sorties, Iraq did not destroy even one U.S. tank or plane. Desert Storm

destroyed, according to U.N. weapons inspectors, 80% of Iraq´s weaponry. As

part of the inspections that followed, 90% of Iraq´s remaining military

capability was destroyed. Iraq has been paying indemnities to Kuwait and

U.S. oil corporations since 1991 and has not had the financial capacity to

build another arsenal. In addition, there has not been a threat by Iraq of

any kind against any other country.

Myth # 6

Iraq threw out the weapons inspectors

Iraq did not tell the inspectors to leave. The weapons inspectors withdrew

in December 1998 because the United States told them to pull out so that

the U.S. could launch a bombing campaign on Baghdad. The next day, on

December 16, the U.S. unleashed Operation Desert Fox, which included

dropping 1,100 bombs and Cruise missiles on Iraq. After the bombing

campaign, a Washington Post report confirmed the assertions of Iraq that

the inspections were intelligence-gathering exercises conducted on the

orders of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Pentagon used the

information collected from the so-called inspections to set up coordinates

for its bombing operations. After this revelation, the Iraqi government

quite understandably did not let the inspectors back in.

Myth # 7

Sanctions are a kinder, gentler way to deal with Iraq

The plan for sanctions on Iraq came from the Pentagon, not the Department

of Health and Human Services. It was a central part of the Pentagon´s war

strategy against the Iraqi people. Sanctions have been more devastating

than the Gulf War itself. "UNICEF confirms that five to six thousand Iraqi

children are dying unnecessarily every month due to the impact of the

sanctions, and that figure is probably modest," Denis Halliday told a

Congressional hearing in October 1998. Halliday, who had just resigned his

post as U.N. Assistant Secretary General and head of the U.N. humanitarian

mission in Iraq, spoke of the "tragic incompatibility of sanctions with the

U.N. Charter and the Convention on Human Rights."

Myth # 8

The UN allows U.S. and U.K. planes to bomb the "No Fly Zones"

The United States agreed to a ceasefire with Iraq in February 1991. The

no-flight zones over two-thirds of Iraq were imposed by the U.S., Britain

and France 18 months after the Gulf War. The United Nations has never

sanctioned the no-flight zones. France has since condemned them. The

so-called no-flight zones are in violation of international law. Iraq has

every right under international law and all known laws in the world to

defend itself in these U.S.-declared no-flight zones. According to Article

51 of the U.N. Charter, Iraq has the right of self-defense in all of its

country, including these "no-flight zones."

Myth # 9

The people support a war on Iraq

Not even opinion polls support this phony assertion. The polls confirm that

there is wide opposition to a war. Normally there is wide support for a

president who is about to launch a war. Instead, Congressional offices

report overwhelming constituent opposition to a unilateral war on Iraq.

Worldwide, the opposition is even bigger. While British Prime Minister Tony

Blair is a vocal acolyte of Bush, few in Britain support a war on Iraq.

Already, a march against war of 400,000 was held in London. Similar

demonstrations have been held in Rome and Madrid. The general sentiment in

Europe was summed up by the Greek Development Minister who said, "We are

totally opposed to any military conflict ... even if there is a UN

Resolution." Around the world, the sentiment is no different. New Zealand´s

government opposes the war. No country in the Middle East supports a war on

Iraq. Lebanon, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the

United Arab Emirates all oppose a war. As do France, Russia and China.

Myth # 10

War will be good for the economy

It already costs U.S. taxpayers $50 billion per year to keep U.S. armed

forces in the Persian Gulf. The estimated $200 billion for a war on Iraq

will come straight out of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education

and welfare. The average working-class taxpayer will foot the bill. The

upper classes have already had their taxes greatly reduced so that they pay

only a small part of the bill.

Myth # 11

This war will be quick and painless

War is rarely quick, never painless. A new war will be neither. The 4.8

million people in Baghdad face an invasion by the most modern and lethally

equipped military in the world. Iraq is a nation of 22 million people. They

will bear the brunt of the pain and the deaths of the war.

Myth # 12

Gulf War Syndrome is a myth

The Veterans Benefits Administration Office noted that 36% of Desert Storm

vets have filed claims for service-related disabilities. A primary reason

is because the U.S. used Depleted Uranium. In July 1990, "The U.S. Army

Armaments Munitions and Chemical Command admitted DU posed longterm risks

to natives and combat veterans... . Low doses have been linked to cancer."

Gulf War vets have a 500% greater incidence of Lou Gehrig´s disease than

the general population. Desert Storm female vets have a 300% greater

incidence of bearing children with birth defects. For male vets the figure

is 200%.


Prepared by the International A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition

NYC: 39 West 14 Street #206, New York, NY 10011




12:58 AM Re: ANSWERing Bush´s Big Myths About Iraq

This is why the WhiteHourse wanted to secure exemptions from the UN World Court, because many of those involved with this war´s planning know they are already wanted before the Hague for war crimes against humanity. Many elected representitives, military officers, solders, agents, civilians and corporate leaders involved with this illegal war of aggression will also become wanted international war criminals after the war´s conclusion, just like the WWII Nazi´s who are hunted to this day. As Bush has waved his and other participants rights to a fair trial before the Hague, a UN sponsored star-chamber (fashioned after those created by this administration) will most likely be established following the war to rid humanity of these dangerous war criminals.

Imagine, if those found guilty of trading with the enemy during WWII had have been swiftly dealt with by a star-chamber, instead of being excused, we would likely not be facing a possible extinction event now.