|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 11:15 am Post subject: Australia: Government may pursue Iran for inciting hatred |
 |
|
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Politics/?id=1.0.2161602956
| Quote: |
Australia: Government may pursue Iran for inciting hatred
Canberra, 14 May (AKI) - The Australian government is preparing to prosecute Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the International Court of Justice for inciting hatred against Israel.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says the government is getting legal advice on whether Australia could take action against the Iranian president.
The government first raised the idea that it would try to take the Iranian leader to the international court last year.
On Wednesday, Rudd told the Sky television news channel that Ahmadinejad's repeated comments about eliminating Israel were appalling.
"They are an incitement to international violence," he said.
"What we have said in the past is that we will take legal advice, which the attorney-general is currently doing, in terms of whether there is a profitable way forward here through the appropriate international legal mechanisms."
Attorney-general Robert McClelland also told The Australian newspaper that the government was seeking legal advice on taking Ahmadinejad to the ICJ.
"The government considers the comments made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, calling for the destruction of Israel and questioning the existence of the holocaust, to be repugnant and offensive," McClelland told The Australian.
"The government is currently taking advice on this matter."
He told the newspaper there was a potential for loss of life if international legal mechanisms were not pursued.
Australia is the only country in the world pursuing Iran's leader for allegedly "inciting genocide" and denying the holocaust.
McClelland, a minister in the centre left Labor government elected last year, pushed for the campaign against Ahmadinejad when he was foreign affairs spokesman while in opposition.
Before the election in 2007 Rudd promised the Jewish community he would take legal proceedings against Ahmadinejad to the ICJ. |
This is an interesting idea. Can the global order be made less hateful via hate-crimes trials? I don't think this will have the outcomes Rudd desires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Countdown to the inevitable post...5,4... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| Countdown to the inevitable post...5,4... |
The one about how everything would be all better if they just "gave up their war?"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
it's full of stars
Joined: 26 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway.
and if reference to a post above : Saddam never gave up his war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway. |
Care to prove this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway.
and if reference to a post above : Saddam never gave up his war. |
There are over 4,000 dead soldiers, more by a 1000 than died on 9/11, who would disagree with you. There are over 30,000 casualties that would disagree with you.
There are hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis who would disagree with you.
Seriously Joo, how can you even argue that point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway.
and if reference to a post above : Saddam never gave up his war. |
There are over 4,000 dead soldiers, more by a 1000 than died on 9/11, who would disagree with you. There are over 30,000 casualties that would disagree with you.
There are hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis who would disagree with you.
Seriously Joo, how can you even argue that point? |
So confident. So earnest. But not so accurate.
The casualty total was 580 by the time Saddam was captured in December 2003. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway.
and if reference to a post above : Saddam never gave up his war. |
There are over 4,000 dead soldiers, more by a 1000 than died on 9/11, who would disagree with you. There are over 30,000 casualties that would disagree with you.
There are hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis who would disagree with you.
Seriously Joo, how can you even argue that point? |
Saddam killed 300,000 Iraqis and that doesn't include his war with Iran would have killed off the Kurds and reinvaded Kuwait had he not been contained.
Futhermore the mideast as it was a threat to the US.
Saddam was one of the great killers in the history of the world worse than Idi Amin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blade wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway. |
Care to prove this? |
I'd be glad to.
www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/09/1070732211173.html
| Quote: |
Saddam Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a figure much higher than previously believed, a new study suggests.
The bloodiest massacres of Saddam's 23-year presidency occurred in Iraq's Kurdish north and Shi'ite Muslim south, but the Gallup Baghdad Survey data indicates the brutality also extended into the capital.
The survey asked 1178 Baghdad residents in August and September whether a member of their household had been executed by Saddam's regime, with 6.6 per cent saying yes.
The polling firm took metropolitan Baghdad's population of 6.39 million people, and average household size of 6.9 people, to calculate that 61,000 people were executed during Saddam's rule.
Past estimates were in the low tens of thousands. Most are believed to have been buried in mass graves.
The US-led occupation authority in Iraq has said at least 300,000 people were buried in mass graves in Iraq.
Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million people were executed.
Without exhumations of the mass graves, it is impossible to confirm a figure.
Scientists said during a recent investigation that they had confirmed 41 mass graves on a list of suspected sites that covers 270 locations.
Forensic teams will begin to exhume four of those graves next month, searching for evidence for a new tribunal, expected to be established this week, that will try members of the former regime for crimes against humanity and genocide.
More graves will later be added to the list.
But nobody expects all the mass graves to be exhumed, and nobody expects to ever know the full number of Iraqis executed by Saddam's regime. |
| Quote: |
Secondary Level of Mass Murderers:
Obviously, we're going to run into the same vagueries and uncertainties when we try to rank numbers 4 through 10 on the list of the 20th Century's worst killers, but at least we can nominate the candidates. A pretty good case could be made that each of the following rulers (listed alphabetically) were responsible for over a million unjust, unnecessary or unnatural deaths by initiating or intensifying war, famine, democide or resettlement, or by allowing people under their control to do so:
Chiang Kai-shek (China: 1928-49)
Enver Pasha (Turkey: 1913-18 )
Hirohito (Japan: 1926-89)
Hirota Koki (Japan: 1936-37)
Ho Chi Minh (North Vietnam: 1945-69 )
Kim Il Sung (North Korea: 1948-94)
Lenin (USSR: 1917-24)
Leopold II (Belgium: 1865-1909)
Nicholas II (Russia: 1894-1917)
Pol Pot (Cambodia: 1975-79)
Saddam Hussein (Iraq: 1969- )
Tojo Hideki (Japan: 1941-44)
Wilhelm II (Germany: 1888-1918 )
Yahya Khan (Pakistan: 1969-71) |
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm
| Quote: |
Nor is there reason to be confident about how Saddam Hussein will behave once he has acquired a nuclear weapon.
He has been anything but circumspect about his aspirations: He has stated that he wants to turn Iraq into a "superpower" that will dominate the Middle East, to liberate Jerusalem and to drive the United States out of the region. He has said he believes the only way he can achieve his goals is through the use of force. Indeed, his half-brother and former chief of intelligence, Barzan al-Tikriti, was reported to say that Iraq needs nuclear weapons because it wants "a strong hand in order to redraw the map of the Middle East." |
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2003/0221iraq_pollack.aspx
| Quote: |
| This brings us to the biggest problem with Pelletiere's argument: If the Kurds were legitimate battlefield casualties, why is it Saddam subsequently felt the need to slaughter nearly 100,000 more of them? Pelletiere writes that any other examples of Saddam's chemical deployment on Kurdish victims "must show that [the dead Kurds] were not pro-Iranian Kurdish guerillas who died fighting alongside Iranian Revolutionary guards." But even if Saddam's goal was to root out traitors, it's inconceivable that all or even most of the residents of the dozens of Kurdish villages Saddam subsequently razed were treacherous peshmerga, or that Saddam believed this to be the case. Certainly the accounts of hundreds of Kurdish refugees, who have provided remarkably consistent accounts of the genocide despite being dispersed from Iran to Turkey, refute this. So does the fact that Saddam kept gassing the Kurds after signing the August 20, 1988 ceasefire with Iran, a point made by Samantha Power in her 2002 book A Problem From Hell. And in unguarded moments, members of Saddam's regime have given lie to this rationale as well. Saddam's cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, entrusted to carry out the Kurdish slaughter, was caught on tape at a Ba'athist meeting in May 1988 boasting about the Kurds, "I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? *beep* them!" (Human Rights Watch believes the tape is mislabeled, recording a conversation that really took place in 1987--i.e., before Halabja.) |
http://www.wadinet.de/news/iraq/nw1082_history.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| blade wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| it's full of stars wrote: |
| Impressive, why don't they arrest Blair, Bush, et al for mass murder? |
because taking down Saddam saved lives. Lives saved because of an action count too, maybe not in your book but they still count anyway. |
Care to prove this? |
I'd be glad to.
www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/09/1070732211173.html
| Quote: |
Saddam Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a figure much higher than previously believed, a new study suggests.
The bloodiest massacres of Saddam's 23-year presidency occurred in Iraq's Kurdish north and Shi'ite Muslim south, but the Gallup Baghdad Survey data indicates the brutality also extended into the capital.
The survey asked 1178 Baghdad residents in August and September whether a member of their household had been executed by Saddam's regime, with 6.6 per cent saying yes.
The polling firm took metropolitan Baghdad's population of 6.39 million people, and average household size of 6.9 people, to calculate that 61,000 people were executed during Saddam's rule.
Past estimates were in the low tens of thousands. Most are believed to have been buried in mass graves.
The US-led occupation authority in Iraq has said at least 300,000 people were buried in mass graves in Iraq.
Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million people were executed.
Without exhumations of the mass graves, it is impossible to confirm a figure.
Scientists said during a recent investigation that they had confirmed 41 mass graves on a list of suspected sites that covers 270 locations.
Forensic teams will begin to exhume four of those graves next month, searching for evidence for a new tribunal, expected to be established this week, that will try members of the former regime for crimes against humanity and genocide.
More graves will later be added to the list.
But nobody expects all the mass graves to be exhumed, and nobody expects to ever know the full number of Iraqis executed by Saddam's regime. |
| Quote: |
Secondary Level of Mass Murderers:
Obviously, we're going to run into the same vagueries and uncertainties when we try to rank numbers 4 through 10 on the list of the 20th Century's worst killers, but at least we can nominate the candidates. A pretty good case could be made that each of the following rulers (listed alphabetically) were responsible for over a million unjust, unnecessary or unnatural deaths by initiating or intensifying war, famine, democide or resettlement, or by allowing people under their control to do so:
Chiang Kai-shek (China: 1928-49)
Enver Pasha (Turkey: 1913-18 )
Hirohito (Japan: 1926-89)
Hirota Koki (Japan: 1936-37)
Ho Chi Minh (North Vietnam: 1945-69 )
Kim Il Sung (North Korea: 1948-94)
Lenin (USSR: 1917-24)
Leopold II (Belgium: 1865-1909)
Nicholas II (Russia: 1894-1917)
Pol Pot (Cambodia: 1975-79)
Saddam Hussein (Iraq: 1969- )
Tojo Hideki (Japan: 1941-44)
Wilhelm II (Germany: 1888-1918 )
Yahya Khan (Pakistan: 1969-71) |
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm
| Quote: |
Nor is there reason to be confident about how Saddam Hussein will behave once he has acquired a nuclear weapon.
He has been anything but circumspect about his aspirations: He has stated that he wants to turn Iraq into a "superpower" that will dominate the Middle East, to liberate Jerusalem and to drive the United States out of the region. He has said he believes the only way he can achieve his goals is through the use of force. Indeed, his half-brother and former chief of intelligence, Barzan al-Tikriti, was reported to say that Iraq needs nuclear weapons because it wants "a strong hand in order to redraw the map of the Middle East." |
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2003/0221iraq_pollack.aspx
| Quote: |
| This brings us to the biggest problem with Pelletiere's argument: If the Kurds were legitimate battlefield casualties, why is it Saddam subsequently felt the need to slaughter nearly 100,000 more of them? Pelletiere writes that any other examples of Saddam's chemical deployment on Kurdish victims "must show that [the dead Kurds] were not pro-Iranian Kurdish guerillas who died fighting alongside Iranian Revolutionary guards." But even if Saddam's goal was to root out traitors, it's inconceivable that all or even most of the residents of the dozens of Kurdish villages Saddam subsequently razed were treacherous peshmerga, or that Saddam believed this to be the case. Certainly the accounts of hundreds of Kurdish refugees, who have provided remarkably consistent accounts of the genocide despite being dispersed from Iran to Turkey, refute this. So does the fact that Saddam kept gassing the Kurds after signing the August 20, 1988 ceasefire with Iran, a point made by Samantha Power in her 2002 book A Problem From Hell. And in unguarded moments, members of Saddam's regime have given lie to this rationale as well. Saddam's cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, entrusted to carry out the Kurdish slaughter, was caught on tape at a Ba'athist meeting in May 1988 boasting about the Kurds, "I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? *beep* them!" (Human Rights Watch believes the tape is mislabeled, recording a conversation that really took place in 1987--i.e., before Halabja.) |
http://www.wadinet.de/news/iraq/nw1082_history.htm |
Joo, how many of these deaths did the invasion prevent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the US had not contained Saddam then Saddam would have killed off the Kurds and invaded Kuwait again and rebult WMDs. The US could not contain Saddam forever. Remember his sons were coming up next.
US policy towards Iraq prevented Saddam from doing such things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
If the US had not contained Saddam then Saddam would have killed off the Kurds and invaded Kuwait again and rebult WMDs. The US could not contain Saddam forever. Remember his sons were coming up next.
US policy towards Iraq prevented Saddam from doing such things. |
Dude, I asked you for proof, not conjecture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The proof was in Saddam' s past actions and agenda.
What do you think that Saddam would have made nice if he had not been contained? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
The proof was in Saddam' s past actions and agenda.
What do you think that Saddam would have made nice if he had not been contained? |
Well I contend that sanctions were paradoxically responsible for keeping Saddam in power after the Kuwait war was over. Thanks to the sanctions over a million Iraqi's died in the years after the war and at the same time they afforded Saddam the opportunity to strengthen his grip over his people.
Also I find it amusing how western governments conveniently looked the other way when Saddam was gassing the Kurds and poisoning the marsh Arabs when these things were actually happening but then when it suited them a couple of years later to use the very same human violations as one of there pretexts for a war.
Over a million people died because of the murderous UN imposed sanctions over a ten year period but in only about five years the US and it's lackeys have managed to kill near the same number in their botched take over of Iraq and I bet that Iraqi's are still dying in their thousands on top of this 1 million figure because they still don't have access to many of the social services we in the west (and they before the first Iraq war) take for granted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
