Provisions for War Crimes against the Winning Side...

Provisions for War Crimes against the Winning Side....hahahahahahahaha...does such a notion even exist?

If an invading army takes over a country, they should NOT topple the existing monuments of the country's newly deposed leaders as if they were goalposts after a football game.

They can respectfully take them down, but not in the circuslike, propogandistic arena that we are are currently witnessing in Iraq.

The manner in which we are taking down the Saddam statues is so like "taunting" after a touchdown is scored in football, and in football, taunting is a penalty.

i find it highly offensive the way the coalition have toppled the statues (and flown coalition flags). i certainly think they have no right to do that. according to the US, it's not a war for sovereignty, but a war for liberation. if that's the case, then they should cover the statues up and when the people's elected party starts governing, then THEY decide what to do with them.

I blame Bushes alleged love for shooting wild game with guns from a safe distance for this despicable act that should be a war crimes violation.

He probably got a good chuckle watching the statues topple. I also blame the press corpse, who probably feel "justified" in encouraging the Iraq's to topple all things Hussein so they can feel that their trek
documenting the war was justified.

It's really quite sad. The moment when class could have been demostrated, we are treated to crass acts instead.

And the War Crimes list, against the winning side, grows. Precious, one of a kind, artwork and books, some over a thousand years old, have been destroyed even as the U.S. claims "control" over the city of Iraq.

Could it be that the circus like atmosphere created by the toppling of the Iraqi Statues of Saddam Hussein TOOK PRECEDENCE over guarding these precious cultural heritages? Of course they did, cuz were americans, and the only thing that matters is that which we say matters.

How sad that the reporters covering the Iraq war CHOSE to encourage and videotape the toppling of the statues of Saddam Hussein rather than try and figure out a way to use the power of the media to help prevent the INEVITABLE looting and destruction of Iraqi cultural history.

I bet the thought to protect Iraqi heritage never even entered the minds of our media or our government.

Animals kept under lock and key have either been stolen, or left in their cages with no food for over 10 days. But why should an American president, who has allegedly killed lions and tigers and belongs to the "millionaires club", (a group compromised of delusional Walter Mitty wannabees who presumeably kill wild animals after the animals are drugged into submission, aka "canned hunts") value the life of an animal that probably sits as a trophy kill somewhere in his domicile.

Mr. Bush chooses to believe that he writes the test questions that he must pass, and we all fail as a result.

Mr. Rumsfeld seems to take great pride in the topplin gof the Saddamn statues. I don't know what's more dangerous, his complete idiocy in this particular matter, or the fact that no one has stood up and protested this action, at least no one that has made it to the U.S. Airwaves.

I think the past few months have proven that the football mentality used by the United States just hardend the resolve of the most militant Iraqi people and has probably translated into more American Casualities as a result.

So now we have a new question to pose, If you knew that the ridiculous act of toppling Saddam's statue just to feel good would result in 10 more American Deaths, was it worth it?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Forum-405:
Mr. Rumsfeld seems to take great pride in the topplin gof the Saddamn statues. I don't know what's more dangerous, his complete idiocy in this particular matter, or the fact that no one has stood up and protested this action, at least no one that has made it to the U.S. Airwaves.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, here is the latest. I haven't found a link yet but a statue of George Bush was toppled in England yesterday.

So now we're "demolishing" Saddam Statues


But when Afghanistan destoryed icons sculpted onto the side of a mountain, they were being barbarians.

Is anyone surprised that we have been posing Iraqi soldiers for a Hustler magazine layout? It all starts at the top.

If Rumsfeld brings to justice those involved, it will probably be self-incrimination. Wanna bet Rumsfeld has seen those pictures a while ago and probably had a good laugh about it? Anyone stupid enough to topple Saddam's statue (and don't forget, they then wrapped an American flag around it for a short while) is stupid enough to have gotten a good laugh out of these pictures before they were made public. This is just a hunch but would you bet that someone's computers at this very moment are being destroyed to hide evidence that Rumsfeld saw the Iraqi prisoner's pictures via email before they were made public?

Perhaps Rumsfeld gets a Pardon from Bush. The question is does Bush do it now or does Bush hope he gets re-elected so he can wait until after the election to Pardon Rummy.

Rummy is a good old boy who doesn't have a clue or a backbone when it comes to protecting those who are not part of his "clique".