[Papergut]

Seven Iraqi victims of the 1991 Gulf War have lodged an official war crimes complaint against former US President George Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell.
The move, under a Belgian law allowing universal reach in war crimes, has been criticised by Powell - who questioned whether it would restrict his rights to attend meetings at Nato headquarters in Brussels.
Jean-Marie Dermagne, a lawyer for the seven, said the timing of the complaint was closely linked to the current Iraq crisis, and was aimed at highlighting the threat to innocent lives from a fresh conflict.
The complaint is also targeted against current US Vice President Dick Cheney, and retired commander of the US troops in Iraq, General Norman Schwartzkopf.
It centres on the bombing of the al-Amiriya shelter in Baghdad, on February 13 1991, which killed 403 people, including 52 children and 261 women. US officials believed the shelter was a command centre.
Mr Dermagne said: "Our action goes beyond the symbolic. It is as much political as it is legal." Belgian courts will now have to decide whether the complaint is admissible.
Powell said: "It affects the ability of people to travel in Belgium without being subject to this kind of threat. For a place that is an international centre they should be a little bit concerned about this."
Belgian foreign ministry spokesman Didier Seeuws insisted Powell was still welcome in Belgium, adding: "In his position, he enjoys immunity. He need not worry."
Under a 1993 law, Belgian courts can hear war crimes cases no matter who allegedly committed them or where. The law was strengthened in 1999 when Belgian courts also were allowed to hear cases of genocide and crimes against humanity.
So far the only people convicted under the laws are four Rwandans found guilty of involvement in the 1994 genocide in the central African nation.
© Associated Press

[Muselmane]

I bet these people will "disappear" soon ...

[Sapper]

War crimes my ass. You'll see war crimes when you're walking into a camp with a sign that says, "Work will set you free." Pussy-ass whiners...

[Siberian Fox]

You call them "pussy ass whiners" yet these are people whos relatives were blown up by an American bomb whilest in a civilian shelter.

That is pretty good reason to be annoyed. As I am sure you would be.

Quite frankly your comments are just plain childish.

[Sapper]

Perhaps, but it is war.

You can't find a war in which a civilian wasn't killed. Crap happens. That's war.

Also, I probably wouldn't be asking for them to be charged as war criminals.

[CasX]

Perhaps, but it is war.

You can't find a war in which a civilian wasn't killed. Crap happens. That's war.

Also, I probably wouldn't be asking for them to be charged as war criminals.

I bet nothing like this has ever happened to you.

Quite frankly your comments are just plain childish.

[gqtie]

Sapper46123: You can't find a war in which a civilian wasn't killed. Crap happens. That's war.

You can't find a homicide in which a person wasn't killed. Crap happens. That's murder.

So, what's the big deal with murder?

Einstein: "It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."

[CasX]

That's a good point gqtie, and the Einstein quote rocks.

[teh wez]

It is tragic what happened to those people, but to charge war crimes against bush and powell does not make sense. You can assume with relative ease that the US did not mean to hit that target and it was merely an accident. During times of war mistakes are going to be made with inaccurate intelligence and/or pilot error. Basically, you would need more information on what specifically happened on this occurance other than its face value that 300 people were killed; with that you can make anything look bad. If it can be proven that powell/bush sr. meant to hit this camp to hurt the people of iraq then im all for the war crimes tribunal, however, i dont find that likely. This will eventually be lost like most things of this nature and i would not put much merit into it. Lets also not forget about the many crimes against humanity that Saddam himself has committed against his own people, which by far out weigh the isolated incident involving the bombing of that camp type place.

[Sapper]

War is essentially massed murder is it not?

Saddam could more easily be tried for "crimes" against humanity than Bush Sr. or Powl.

[gqtie]

teh wez: Lets also not forget about the many crimes against humanity that Saddam himself has committed against his own people, which by far out weigh the isolated incident involving the bombing of that camp type place.

Certainly. But why didn't those many crimes bother Bush until Saddam threatened US oil interests?

Sapper46123: Saddam could more easily be tried for "crimes" against humanity than Bush Sr. or Powl.

And he should. But, instead, let's bomb tens of thousands of Iraqis to death, and creat an environment in which half a million could perish.

[Sapper]

Or we could just get Saddam with a bullet and call it a secret trial?

I don't think that there will be lot's of civilian casualties. I do expect there to be civilian casualties, but that's war for ya. I could be wrong, it just depends on the citizens of Iraq I guess. But, if a civilian gets up and starts shooting our soldiers, he's not a civilian any more. If someone houses Iraqi soldiers & provides for them, he is no longer a civilian.

I believe Bush Sr. stopped supporting Iraq after he gassed the Kurds.

[gqtie]

Sapper46123: Or we could just get Saddam with a bullet and call it a secret trial?

Looks like that may have already happened last night with much more than a bullet. That'll save the US from being implicated in his trial for having aided Saddam in his crimes.

Sapper46123: I don't think that there will be lot's of civilian casualties.

The UN has reported that as many as 500,000 Iraqis will require medical treatment for injuries sustained from war. How many of those will die? How many will die instantly?

Sapper46123: But, if a civilian gets up and starts shooting our soldiers, he's not a civilian any more. If someone houses Iraqi soldiers & provides for them, he is no longer a civilian.

As long as your logic works both ways. That is, through our governments citizens finance atrocities around the world, so you would agree that most first-world citizens are combatants, free to be killed in war? Was 9-11 justified in this regard?

Sapper46123: I believe Bush Sr. stopped supporting Iraq after he gassed the Kurds.

Aid increased and continued to the day Saddam invaded Kuwait.

[Sapper]

Under your logic, no one is a civilian. Which, you are right I guess.

[teh wez]

Everyone continually says that this war is about the oil and that it seems as if Iraq had done something that is impeding the flow of oil to America. I have not really seen any documents of this so i can never form an opinion of it. If anyone could show me some places to find information on the subject, please do. Also, we shall see how many civilian deaths are there and see how many of these could of been averted. Weapons technology has increased dramatically since the last gulf war and they have probably had more than enough time to improve bomb accuaracy. Lets just see what happens, things do not seem to be going as original planned.

[gqtie]

Sapper46123, I was following your logic.

teh wez: Everyone continually says that this war is about the oil and that it seems as if Iraq had done something that is impeding the flow of oil to America.

The best article I've read on the subject: http://www.mediamonitors.net/williamclark1.html

Although completely suppressed by the U.S. media, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is an oil currency war. The real reason for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. This essay will discuss the macroeconomics of the `petro-dollar' and the unpublicized but real threat to U.S. economic hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. The author advocates reform of the global monetary system including a dollar/euro currency ‘trading band’ with reserve status parity, and a dual OPEC oil transaction standard. These reforms could potentially reduce future oil currency warfare.

If anyone could show me some places to find information on the subject, please do.

Iraq has the second largest reserves. To be in control of such resource is to create hegemony over countries (which include many of those opposed to the war) that depend on that oil.

Weapons technology has increased dramatically since the last gulf war and they have probably had more than enough time to improve bomb accuaracy.

Well, 1,000 to 6,000 innocents murdered in Afghanistan.

[KurtFF8]

Well, 1,000 to 6,000 innocents murdered in Afghanistan.

where did u get those numbers from?

[gqtie]

http://www.cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm

"What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties -- 3,000 - 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths -- in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4593608,00.html

"In Afghanistan it is calculated that bombing killed about 5,000 civilians directly. Up to 20,000 other Afghans died through the disruption of drought relief and the bombing's other indirect effects, according to a Guardian investigation of death rates at camps for the internally displaced."

I fail to find the source for the more conservative estimate of deaths directly by bombing of 1,000.

[teh wez]

Thanks gqtie that was a very interesting article, although i couldn't read all of it because of school work i did get the jist of it. It really seems that the war could of been averted if a reworking of th currency could of been banged out. However, even I must say that Bush is very aggressive and needs to see grey areas of things and not his religious bullshit good and evil. However, on the civilian deaths i dont think that 1000 is not that bad and as the large range that you suggested "1000-6000" suggests no one really knows for sure. But if it is proven that it is reaching the 5000 area then ill raise my eyebrows. By the way, thanks again because i can say with absolute certainity that that has never been mentioned on any US media station.