Talk:Bush Administration War Crimes in Iraq

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search

I wanted to ask before I did this, but can most of this be put here in the discussion page? Theres a distinct lack of sources or citations in the piece, and when it comes to an accusation as heavy as war crimes, I think it helps not to just bandy around the term. It's not I agree or disagree with the article, its just it should be alot more detailed and specific, lest we have a bajillion people come in and start an edit war. Also, I removed Montoya's name from the article since we don't sign articles on SourceWatch.

User:SiberioS


it probably doesn't belong on this site as it is written but, SiberoS, your rationale for its impropriety, that it might cause an editing war is, as i will lamely state: real wiki.

my problem with its posting here is that the allegations and conjectures are posted without solid citations.

Montoya, at least put up the significant part of the Geneva Convention, don't just cite clauses. Most Americans havent a clue what is in the document, and they believe that just because persons fighting for th eTaliban in Afghanistan did not have a uuniform, they do not get protected by the Geneva Conventions. There must also be some timelines and datelines. the early Official Red Cross Protests, Gonzales terming the Genava Protocols "quaint". I have bits and piecs of things, me what you are lacking in terms of news or a few docs, and i'll look around. --Hugh Manatee 01:24, 14 Jan 2005 (EST)


I agree -- this article needs a lot of work. I'm all for moving to the talk page as it kust isn't up to the necessary standard for an article. --Bob Burton 01:43, 14 Jan 2005 (EST)

I would prefer to see intelligent discussion and additions concerning principles of the Nuremberg trials, which directly relate to wars of aggression and directly compared to US aggressive warfare since August 2, 1964; eg the opinions expressed at Nuremberg have some real relevance to global US aggression in general, and the Bush administration's aggression in Iraq in particular. As posted, I would expect to see objections to this article based less upon personal opinion and conjecture about American's lack of knowledege concerning the four Geneva accords, and for that objection to concentrate more upon the fact that significant relevance/comparison between the Nuremberg opinions and Bush's aggression in Iraq, which has been left out.