This war is both illegal and immoral; illegal because, in the words of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, a military attack without the support of the United Nations Security Council is a violation of international law and a very serious breach of human rights.
The UN Charter specifies exactly when it is legitimate for one country to use force against another and the UK Government has not demonstrated that any of the specified grounds exist. On the contrary, the UK Government generally, and Blair and Straw specifically, told the UK people of the necessity for a second UN resolution, recognising that 1441 did not give authority for war.
These gentlemen invested time and energy to achieve such a pre-requisite but failed. Failure does not justify illegal action. Countries in the UN supported 1441 because they were assured by the likes of the US Ambassador that it in itself was not a trigger for war, and that a second resolution would be required. Having failed to get the necessary legal authority to wage war Bush and his poodle Blair then proceeded through lies and deceit, spin and counter-spin to try to justify their illegal invasion.
The immorality of their actions will have serious consequences for the world. They have overturned the rules for war and introduced the immoral doctrine of pre-emptive strike on the grounds of a perceived threat. We are back to the law of the jungle; survival of the fittest and to hell with the weak.
Whilst George Bush flagged up this murderous policy some years ago, I have to say I am greatly disappointed at Blair for allowing himself to be sucked into such a black hole. But that’s what happens when arrogance replaces lucid thought. He knows better than the people; he’s convinced he’s right. God help us.
The fact that the churches and the people don’t agree doesn’t really matter. Tony wants to emulate the arrogant strut of Bush, whose concerns for human rights and life leaves a lot to be desired. Remember his black record with the electric chair.
And now the US and UK have invaded Iraq – to protect the world and yes, to ‘liberate’ the Iraqi people. This country Iraq, which has been bombed since the last Gulf War, and in the words of a former arms inspector, Dr Scott Ritter, no nation has been disarmed like Iraq – is seen as a threat.
A country whose population of 22 million is nearly half children is a ‘threat to the world’! It’s like saying like I’m a threat to Lennox Lewis if I had my hands tied behind my back and was blind-folded. How can anyone admire two of the world’s greatest armies invading such a country? An American Senator, Russell Byrd declared: “I truly must question the judgement of any president who can say that a massive, unprovoked attack on a nation which is over 50 percent children is in the highest moral tradition of our country.”
Why did Bush and Blair not give more time to Hans Blix and his colleagues? Why the rush to invade? The answer given is to ‘liberate’, to free these poor Iraqi people. Again, can I quote: “Our armies do not come into you cities and lands as conquerors or as enemies, but as liberators.” These are not the words of Bush or Blair, but the words of Lieutenant General Stanley Maude, some 86 years ago. What has changed? How many times must the West show this false compassion?
This invasion will cost hundreds of lives unnecessarily. If Bush and Blair had invested in humanitarian causes in Iraq even a fraction of the billions of pounds and dollars that this invasion will cost, we would not now be facing such a bleak future.
“Surely I defeat my enemy when I make him my friend.” Or is this invasion simply because, in the words of Henry Kissinger “Oil is much too important a commodity to be left in the hands of Arabs.”
ENDS