# Does Lt. Watada stand any chance of acquittal? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 7, 2007, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222 "2007-02-07T16:51:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/81 "2010-10-12T17:17:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Even under US law, a ratified treaty is “the supreme law of the land,” on a par with a Constitutional Amendment. The attack on Iraqi sovereignty was illegal any way you slice it. Not on par with a constitutional amendment, but on par with federal law. Which a moment’s thought would make clear, because otherwise a treaty agreed to by 51 senators and the President could modify the Constitution, something that actually takes 2/3rds of each house of Congress and 3/4s of the state legislatures to do. The Constitution, the laws made by Congress under its Constitutional powers, and treaties ratified by Congress are all “supreme law of the land.” But just as laws made by Congress can’t abridge the Constitution, neither can a treaty. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/82 "2010-10-12T17:36:43Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Of course international law is applicable. Even under the US Constitution it’s applicable under the Supremacy Clause. The UN Charter is a treaty ratified by Congress. That makes it US law. The invasion of Iraq was a straight up violation of the UN Charter. It is illegal to overthrow another government for any reason but immediate self defense. We toppled another government for no defensive reason. That make it illegal. The only rebuttal the Bush apologists have is the argument that the UN doesn’t physically have the ability to punish the US for it, which is lame. That’s not a criterion for whether something is illegal. > > > > Even under US law, a ratified treaty is “the supreme law of the land,” on a par with a Constitutional Amendment. The attack on Iraqi sovereignty was illegal any way you slice it. > > Sure, International Law has validity in the USA, however, it does come _after_ the Constitution. When it’s ratified by Congress, it’s the same as federal law. Is there anything about the UN Charter which is unconstitutional. > [@](#): > > The Invasion of Iraq was justified by the “self-defense” loophole. Now, your opinion (and that of many others) may think that the US claims there are pretty bogus. However, only the UN Security Council may fine that the actions of the USA were illegal. They have not done so (nor are they likely to do so), thus that means that the actions of the USA are not illegal in fact. The Secretary-General of the UN said [it was illegal](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/83 "2010-10-12T17:38:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Even under US law, a ratified treaty is “the supreme law of the land,” on a par with a Constitutional Amendment. The attack on Iraqi sovereignty was illegal any way you slice it. > > Not on par with a constitutional amendment, but on par with federal law. Which a moment’s thought would make clear, because otherwise a treaty agreed to by 51 senators and the President could modify the Constitution, something that actually takes 2/3rds of each house of Congress and 3/4s of the state legislatures to do. > > The Constitution, the laws made by Congress under its Constitutional powers, and treaties ratified by Congress are all “supreme law of the land.” But just as laws made by Congress can’t abridge the Constitution, neither can a treaty. Is there anything about the UN Charter which is in conflict with the US Constitution? Is there any question we violated the Charter? ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/84 "2010-10-12T17:39:26Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I take that as an admission by the Court that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. Interesting. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/85 "2010-10-12T17:44:08Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Is there anything about the UN Charter which is in conflict with the US Constitution? Yes. > [@](#): > > Is there any question we violated the Charter? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![jonesj2205](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecc23a/32.png) [@jonesj2205](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jonesj2205)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/86 "2010-10-12T17:48:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The Secretary-General of the UN said [it was illegal](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm). I had a professor who said I would be capable of getting a master’s degree. Does that mean I have one even though I didn’t actually go through any of the steps to get one? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/87 "2010-10-12T17:48:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Is there anything about the UN Charter which is in conflict with the US Constitution? > > Yes. What? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Is there any question we violated the Charter? > > Yes. Did we remove Saddam Hussein in self-defense (hint: the answer is no). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/88 "2010-10-12T17:49:23Z")
> [@jonesj2205](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > The Secretary-General of the UN said [it was illegal](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm). > > I had a professor who said I would be capable of getting a master’s degree. Does that mean I have one even though I didn’t actually go through any of the steps to get one? I fail to see how this is analogous. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/89 "2010-10-12T17:54:17Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@jonesj2205](#): > > > > I had a professor who said I would be capable of getting a master’s degree. Does that mean I have one even though I didn’t actually go through any of the steps to get one? > > I fail to see how this is analogous. If one wants a master’s degree, there are a series of steps that must be followed before that degree is real. That series of steps was not followed. Ergo, there is no master’s degree. If Kofi Annan wants the US invasion to be illegal, there are a series of steps that must be followed before it is. Those steps were not followed. Therefore…? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/90 "2010-10-12T17:59:32Z")
If Kofi Anan says it was illegal, it was illegal. It was illegal even if he didn’t say it. It’s illegal if _nobody_ ever says it. If I run a red light and no cop sees it, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t illegal. You guys are inventing criteria that don’t exist. There are no steps. It was illegal by the letter of the UN Charter. I can’t believe anybody still tries to argue anything else with a straight face. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/91 "2010-10-12T18:28:39Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If Kofi Anan says it was illegal, it was illegal. It was illegal even if he didn’t say it. It’s illegal if _nobody_ ever says it. If I run a red light and no cop sees it, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t illegal. You guys are inventing criteria that don’t exist. There are no steps. It was illegal by the letter of the UN Charter. I can’t believe anybody still tries to argue anything else with a straight face. Is it your contention that if this case had gone to the SCOTUS, that they would have declared the war illegal? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/92 "2010-10-12T18:30:36Z")
Art I, Sec 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Congress may not pass a law that limits a future Congress’ ability to exercise that power. Any treaty purporting to similarly limit Congress’ power under Art 1, Sec 8 is likewise void. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > Yes. > > Did we remove Saddam Hussein in self-defense (hint: the answer is no). Who cares? We acted in accord with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. The Secretary-General is certainly entitled to his opinion, but the position of UN Secretary-General has no particular power to declare member nations’ actions illegal. We might just ask well as the President of Amnesty International or the winner of Texas’ “Miss Onion Fest 2010” (Brittanie Garza, for those interested) what their opinions are. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/93 "2010-10-12T18:34:35Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > If Kofi Anan says it was illegal, it was illegal. It was illegal even if he didn’t say it. It’s illegal if _nobody_ ever says it. If I run a red light and no cop sees it, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t illegal. You guys are inventing criteria that don’t exist. There are no steps. It was illegal by the letter of the UN Charter. I can’t believe anybody still tries to argue anything else with a straight face. > > Is it your contention that if this case had gone to the SCOTUS, that they would have declared the war illegal? I don’t know. They would probably try to avoid ruling on it, but I’m saying that it was plainly illegal regardless of what any court says. Go back to my traffic analogy. Is speeding only illegal if you get convicted of it? ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/94 "2010-10-12T18:35:03Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If Kofi Anan says it was illegal, it was illegal. It was illegal even if he didn’t say it. It’s illegal if _nobody_ ever says it. If I run a red light and no cop sees it, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t illegal. You guys are inventing criteria that don’t exist. There are no steps. It was illegal by the letter of the UN Charter. I can’t believe anybody still tries to argue anything else with a straight face. I can’t believe that you believe your opinion is more valid than what the U.N. has actually done. Kofi can say whatever he likes. Until the U.N. actually does something, whatever Kofi says doesn’t matter. Side note, a question on the U.N and overthrowing governments. You’ve stated that for this to be legal it has to be in self-defense. What about defending another country? How does that fit in? Remember, this whole mess started when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Slee ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/95 "2010-10-12T18:38:55Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Art I, Sec 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Congress may not pass a law that limits a future Congress’ ability to exercise that power. Any treaty purporting to similarly limit Congress’ power under Art 1, Sec 8 is likewise void. Congress did not declare war, but it had no legal authority do so anyway because CONGESS had already ratified a treaty agreeing not to ovethrow other governments for non-defensive reasons. This whole angle is only an attempt to say it didn’t violate US law anyway. It doesn’t change the fact that it still violated international law, and international law trumps US law. > [@](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Did we remove Saddam Hussein in self-defense (hint: the answer is no). > > Who cares? We acted in accord with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. No we didn’t. Nothing in the Security Resolution authorized regime change, and the Council refused to authorize the invasion. We acted in contravention of the the Council not “in accord” with it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/96 "2010-10-12T18:46:21Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Congress did nor declare war, but it had no legal authority do so anyway because CONGESSS had already ratified a treaty agreeing not to ovethrow other governments for non-defensvce reasons. Congress can’t make that agreement, for the same reason that Congress can’t pass a term limits bill. The 104th Congress can’t limit the ability of the 110th Congress to declare war. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Who cares? We acted in accord with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. > > No we didn’t. Nothing in the Security Resolution authorized regime change, and the Council refuse to authorize the invasion. We acted in contravention of the the Council not “in accord” with it. The Resolution said, “Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area…” That alone is the justification. We are a member state. We used all necessary means. End of story. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/97 "2010-10-12T18:50:58Z")
No we didn’t. The Council did not approve the invasion and did not authorize regime change. The United States acted unilaterally, without UN authority and in violation of the UN Charter. It was illegal, and the Secretary-General _said_ it was illegal. You can’t bullshit that we were acting in accordance with the UN when the UN was telling us not to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/98 "2010-10-12T18:51:33Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If Kofi Anan says it was illegal, it was illegal. It was illegal even if he didn’t say it. It’s illegal if _nobody_ ever says it. If I run a red light and no cop sees it, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t illegal. You guys are inventing criteria that don’t exist. There are no steps. It was illegal by the letter of the UN Charter. I can’t believe anybody still tries to argue anything else with a straight face. I didn’t agree with the invasion of iraq and i believe it was a breach of international law but it was nto a breach of US law ANY WAY YOU CUT IT. Congress can pass a law saying one thing one day and pass a law saying the exact opposite the next day and the one that comes later in time sticks. This is MSOT frequently seen int he case of ratified treaties. A ratified treaty is like a law but if congress passes a law the very next day that contradicts teh treaty, the new law applies. The invasion was authorized. It was illegal in the sense taht it broke all sort os international laws but it didn’t break US law. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/99 "2010-10-12T18:53:13Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No we didn’t. The Council did not approve the invasion and did not authorize regime change. The United States acted unilaterally, without UN authority and in violation of the UN Charter. It was illegal, and the Secretary-General _said_ it was illegal. You can’t bullshit that we were acting in accordance with the UN when the UN was telling us not to do it. You seem to have some ridiculous idea that the Secretary-General has the power to issue proclamations of fact, or something, declaring what the UN believes on any given topic. Few ideas could be more wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2010, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222/100 "2010-10-12T18:54:25Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The invasion was authorized. It was illegal in the sense taht it broke all sort os international laws but it didn’t break US law. It’s a more open question whether it broke international law. It did not contravene the UN Charter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-lt-watada-stand-any-chance-of-acquittal/391222.md?page=6)