On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:21:56 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
> Hi Samuel! > sorry ... very long ... and very OT Very long, but very to the point (from a European point of view) so I snipped most and make just some remarks. > But it contains very important views at the end. > About how America wants american law everywhere, and about the RIGHT OF AMERICA > TO DO WHAT IT WANTS, to kill people etc. ************************************************** > For a european mind there are 2 possibilities: > 1) US doesn't have any proof, but wants Iraqi oil > 2) US has indeed prove, but wants US-Iraq war instead of a UN-Iraq mission > Both are inherently bad. > but: > 1) nobody can take actions against not yet commited crimes > 2) the US has no right to take any actions against any country, which the > other countries government did not directly attack america or an american ally. > THESE 2 POINTS ARE OF VITAL IMPORTANCE ... and I don't think that US > understands them. > They mean: > If america (country) attacks another country, without before being attacked by > the official military of the other country, than america is the AGGRESSOR ! > America is than guilty of breaking international law. But America is not procecuted... did Panama attack the US? > 2) they can do their work > again if they find somethinh U_N_ takes measures, if not, than we have to > leave saddam in peace (also we would sleep better if he weren't in power ... > there is no international right which we can use) If they find something... they can destroy these weapons without war. > My problem is that > 1) America still thinks of itself as standing above other countries > 2) America _REFUSES_ International court > Especially point 2 "American Servicemembers' Protection Act" is a *HUGE* > problem. It says that americans and american allies can kill anybody, and that > International court can't react. > Why would any civilized country want to commit crimes ... > and it is clear that AMERICA WANTS TO COMMIT CRIMES ... > than otherwise it wouldn't need that act ... > This is in my eyes a much, much, much more serious problem, than Iraq, Isreal, > North Korea, etc. > And this is why 75% of Europeans think that the US is the biggest threat to > peace in 2003 (according to times survey I posted recently) > SH> There are strong indications that Sadam is planning to attack Israel > SH> some time in the near future. > There are strong indications that US is planning to start war with Iraq. > (without Iraq commiting any crime against the US) Very, very strong indications US wants war! How about Iraqs rights to defend its own teritory? > And it is *ILLEGAL* to attack a country which hasn't done anything. > But it is *VITAL* that an organization standing *ABOVE ANY SINGLE COUNTRY* > monitors the weapon production and takes countermeasures. > If the US attacks without UN mandat than the US acts absolutely ILLEGAL. > It starts a WAR, and *IT* is the aggressor. > If than iraq brings the US to the International court, than it has to speak > them guilty. > There are no arguments for starting a war ... > And you forget THAT UN INSPECTORS *ARE* *CURRENTLY* in the Iraq, to look if > american unproofen accusations are true. > SH> There will be no legal issues and consequences to be dealt with by any > SH> US leaders except in US courts. > THIS IS WHAT THE US WANTS YOU TO THINK BUT IT IS TERRIBLY WRONG !!!!! > SOrry for shouting ... > SH> The US tries its own people for alleged war crimes. We won't send our > SH> accused war criminals to The Hague to be put on trial by European > SH> prosecutors and judges who don't understand American values. "don't understand American values" This US arrogance isolates the US from the world and causes hate, more and more. If US-citizens are captured and brought to The Hague than the US will free them and invade allie and Nato partner Holland... the US told us. The US could have judges in the court! > There are no american values. > There are international laws. > Anybody breaking such a law HAS TO BE PUNISHED. > This is a very vital point to me ... > Anything else is AMERICAN WORLD DICTATORSHIP. *********************************************************** *> If we disagree here, than there is no use speaking on. * *> This is the most basic thing. * *********************************************************** > SH> I believe that most of the world understands that US intentions are > SH> not to start a war against Iraq for the purpose of conquering and > SH> occupying their territory and to steal their oil. > See above ... the intentions ARE NOT IMPORTANT BTW: most of the world can not think of any other reasonable motive for attacking a state that is NOT threatening the US. > STARTING a war is a crime. > That is a fact. > Basically what you say is that AMERICAN LAW can be applied to the whole world. > And this is ENORMOUSLY wrong. > American law is for america. > SH> Sam Heywood > CU, Ricsi Bastiaan
