# Has the Bush Admin. in any way violated international law? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 25, 2008, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715 "2008-03-25T20:41:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/1 "2008-03-25T20:41:37Z")
Just as the thread title asks. Myself, I really don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/2 "2008-03-25T20:45:06Z")
The mind boggles. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/3 "2008-03-25T20:49:15Z")
Well, starting an aggressive war against a smaller nation with desirable natural resources on manufactured pretexts (sold to the internal populace of the nation governed and doing the invading as The Absolute Truth, which we can’t prove for National Security reasons), resulting in incitement of hatred against an ethnic minority, endorsement of legislation backing a particular ideological view and working harm against another minority… I’m fairly sure that these are contrary to International Law as specified in a certain series of court cases. But there’s no way I could prove my thesis without violating Godwin’s Law. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/4 "2008-03-25T20:55:06Z")
[nitpick] You cannot violate Godwin’s Law, you can present an example of its application, but you cannot violate it. [/nitpick] ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/5 "2008-03-25T21:00:02Z")
[“Did Bush commit war crimes?”](http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/61/20858) (Editorial relating to the treatment of prisoners/detainees, not to whether the war itself was illegal.) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/6 "2008-03-25T21:02:37Z")
Wiki article on [Legality of the Iraq War.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War) Pretty thorough. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/7 "2008-03-25T21:32:32Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] You cannot violate Godwin’s Law, you can present an example of its application, but you cannot violate it. [/QUOTE] Well, you can if you run a rancorous debate that _fails_ to elicit a Nazi reference. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/8 "2008-03-25T21:37:43Z")
The short answer is No. The longer answer is No, and not any US law either. The Security Council could declare the invasion of Iraq illegal, but hasn’t. They’re the only ones who can do it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/9 "2008-03-25T21:40:37Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] Well, you can if you run a rancorous debate that _fails_ to elicit a Nazi reference. [/QUOTE] Doesn’t the law merely say that the probability _approaches_ 1, not that it ever reaches it? In that case, failure to reference Nazis is not a violation of Godwin’s law. Unless your thread is infinitely long, that is, but that seems unlikely. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/10 "2008-03-25T21:43:50Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] The short answer is No. The longer answer is No, and not any US law either. The Security Council could declare the invasion of Iraq illegal, but hasn’t. They’re the only ones who can do it. Regards, Shodan [/QUOTE] The Bush Administration hasn’t broken _any_ law, of _any_ kind, _any_ of them, at _any_ point in their tenure? Wow. Here I was thinking that at the _very_ least they’d bypassed mandated procedures for handing out contracts or something, but nope; not even a single speeding ticket amongst the lot of them. Who knew! ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/11 "2008-03-25T21:44:38Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] The Security Council could declare the invasion of Iraq illegal, but hasn’t. They’re the only ones who can do it. [/QUOTE] Actually, the International Court of Justice could declare a violation of the UN Charter, but the US basically hasn’t recognized the ICJ since we violated international law by mining Managua’s harbor back in the 1980s. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/12 "2008-03-25T21:44:59Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] The Security Council could declare the invasion of Iraq illegal, but hasn’t. They’re the only ones who can do it. [/QUOTE] [Not so.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War) > [@](#): > > The UN Security Council, as outlined in Article 39 of the UN Charter, has the ability to rule on the legality of the war, but has not been asked by any UN member nation to do so. The United States and Great Britain have veto power in the Security Council, so action by the Security Council is highly improbable even if the issue were to be raised. Despite this, there is no legal boundary to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) asking that the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—“the principal judicial organ of the United Nations” (Article 92)—give either an ‘advisory opinion’ or ‘judgement’ on the legality of the war. Indeed, the UNGA asked the ICJ to give an ‘advisory opinion’ on “the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel”, by its resolution A/RES/ES-10/14,[8] as recently as 12 December 2003; despite opposition from permanent members of the Security Council. It achieved this by sitting in tenth ‘emergency special session’, under the framework of the ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution. As “the principal judicial organ of the United Nations”, any future ruling by the ICJ on the legality of the war would be definitive. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/13 "2008-03-25T22:43:20Z")
Depends on who you ask I guess. Most backers will of course deny, deny, deny… However: [**Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan**](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq) > [@](#): > > The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal. > > Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN’s founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: “Yes, if you wish.” > > He then added unequivocally: “ **I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal.** ” [**International Law Aspects of the Iraq War and Occupation**](http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/lawindex.htm) > [@](#): > > This section examines the legality of the 2003 US-UK war on Iraq. Shortly before the outbreak of hostilities, UN Secretary General stated that the use of force without Council endorsement would “not be in conformity with the Charter” and many legal experts now describe the US-UK attack as an act of aggression, violating international law. Experts also point to illegalities in the US conduct of the war and violations of the Geneva Conventions by the US-UK of their responsibilities as an occupying power. The section also looks at wartime violations on the Iraqi side. [**Criticism of the Iraq War**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Iraq_War) > [@](#): > > **As of the year 2007, President Bush’s administration made a total of 935 false statements in a two-year period about Iraq’s alleged threat to the United States** Bet that makes some of you proud, huh? [\*\*International legal experts regard Iraq war as illegal[\*\*](http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/ilaw-m26.shtml) > [@](#): > > Prominent international legal experts regard the US-British invasion of Iraq as a clear breach of international law. Earlier this month the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva expressed its “deep dismay that a small number of states are poised to launch an outright illegal invasion of Iraq, which amounts to a war of aggression.” > > According to the ICJ, such “a war waged without a clear mandate from the United Nations Security Council would constitute a flagrant violation of the prohibition of the use of force.” The commission emphasises that Security Council Resolution 1441 does not authorise the use of force. The ICJ standpoint contradicts that of US President Bush, who has continually sought to use this resolution as the basis for war. > > \ > > A prominent German professor of state and international law, Dietrich Murswiek, wrote in the Süddeutsche Zeitung: “The standpoint put forward in the press that by giving orders for an attack without a mandate from the Security Council Bush is operating in a ‘grey area’ is false. Without express allowance through a new resolution, the war against Iraq is a banned war of aggression—a crime from the standpoint of international law.” For the religious (specially Catholics) amongst you: [**Iraq War, Unjust, Illegal and Immoral; Just War Theory Condemns Invasion**](http://www.cjd.org/paper/surlis.html) > [@](#): > > **The Pope made more than fifty public addresses in which he condemned the war in Iraq prior to its inception** and he sent a special emissary, Pio Laghi, to the White House to convey his disapproval, but the Bush Ad-ministration was adamant in pushing for war and even forbade Laghi to address the American people from the White House on the occasion of his visit. Most heads of major religions in the United States, including the head of Bush’s Methodist Church condemned the war as unjust. > > \ > > The central pretext urged by the Bush Administration and by the British Prime Minister Tony Blair for going to war was to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction and a supposedly imminent nuclear capability. Also, by insinuation and bluster, President Bush misled the American people into believing that there was direct complicity between the Hussein regime in Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorists who murdered more than 3,000 people in their bombing attacks of September 11, 2001. All these reasons given for the war are false, thus in terms of just cause alone the war is immoral. > > **It is supremely ironic and hypocritical that American, British and coalition troops used weapons of mass destruction on a devastating scale in searching for non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq**. One bomb that the US used is named the Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB), and it contains ten tons of high explosives. When detonated this bomb obliterates everything within a 1,000 yard radius. In other words it destroys all persons, animals, all living creatures, all vegetation and buildings within a radius of almost one square mile. There is no way that a bomb of this destructive capacity could be used as a precision weapon; what its toll in terms of lives lost and environmental devastation was will not be revealed to us by a Pentagon which says it does not do body counts of Iraqi dead. Finally, the Silver Bullet that many/most of the Create Their Own Reality Crowd still choses to ignore: [**Complete Set of Downing Street Documents**](http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/840) Bolding/highlights mine. Factual conclusions based on evidence presented can only lead to one conclusion. Bushbots excluded of course. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2008, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/14 "2008-03-25T22:53:29Z")
To the extent that there is something called “international law”, and to the extent that the UN charter falls under that umbrella, I don’t think we have many presidents in the modern era who did not violate it. Bush would certainly be on that list with the invasion of Iraq. I don’t see how there can be any question about that. The real question is: who is going to enforce that law against a sitting or ex US president? Answer: no one. So, in that sense, you could argue that the law is _de facto_ nonexistent. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/15 "2008-03-25T23:00:05Z")
Pretty much. A law is no law if it isn’t enforced. It’s just wind. And I am not seeing any hue and cry by The World™ or the International Community (all rights reserved) to enforce this law against the US or Bush et al (I suppose you’d have to go after Congress as well). -XT ---
**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:** [March 25, 2008, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/16 "2008-03-25T23:02:54Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme] I suppose you’d have to go after Congress as well. [/QUOTE] Well, you wouldn’t have to, but you certainly could. In fact one might argue that Congress is more responsible, under international law, since it has the sole power to authorize the use of force as they did for Iraq. For that matter, you might as well throw all the leaders of NATO countries in the slammer for what was done in Bosnia. International law: it’s only for losers. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/17 "2008-03-25T23:03:16Z")
At risk of sounding Clintonesque, I would say the answer is: “It depends on what you mean by ‘violated’ and ‘international law’.” A strict application of the phrase yields the answer ‘no’ – there has been, after all, no finding of guilt in any ajudication in which the US has had a clear statement of charges presented and a chance to defend itself against those charges. And my use of “Clintonesque” in offering that standard is not without meaning, since the same defense was pointed out when anyone would say that former President Bill was a perjurer. I find it humorous that many of the same people who vigorously objected to calling Clintona perjurer based on the lack of any trial or conviction now fall all over themselves to declare that the US is guilty of violations of international law… but that’s how the game is played. So let’s ask ourselves if there’s another, more reasonable meaning. Here’s what I came up with when discussing Clinton: “There is sufficient evidence for the charge, such that, if a reviewing court were asked if a guilty verdict could stand on the record, would undoubtedly answer ‘yes’ – that is, if a conviction _had_ happened, and an appeals were asked to overturn that conviction for insufficient evidence, they would not.” Now, the standards of international law are a bit more fluid – unlike American criminal law, there’s no body of precedent that lays out elements of crimes and standards of proof. But in essaying a fair and even-handed weighing of the evidence, I would say the standard I suggest above would most likely be met: if all the evidence were on the record, and a conviction had happened, a reviewing court would likely conclude that the Bush administration did violate international law, and there was sufficient evidence to uphold such a conviction. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/18 "2008-03-25T23:07:28Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] To the extent that there is something called “international law”, and to the extent that the UN charter falls under that umbrella, I don’t think we have many presidents in the modern era who did not violate it. Bush would certainly be on that list with the invasion of Iraq. I don’t see how there can be any question about that. The real question is: who is going to enforce that law against a sitting or ex US president? Answer: no one. So, in that sense, you could argue that the law is _de facto_ nonexistent. [/QUOTE] Fully agree, **John**. Though I’ll throw in my own caveat: sure there’s certainly no _real_ organization that can stand united VS the wishes of the US – thus much less deter them/you – but what we _can_ and _should_ do is educate, illustrate and prove why said invasion contravened all procedures in place to prevent such a tragedy. And then it is up to each and everyone of us to take a stand against actions such as this one **regardless** of nationality, creed, color and/or gender. Pie in the sky you might rightly say. But what else have we got if not the power of unity against injustice? Putting our arms up and saying “we give” is not much of a protest or revoke. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2008, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/19 "2008-03-25T23:17:08Z")
[QUOTE=RedFury] Fully agree, **John**. Though I’ll throw in my own caveat: sure there’s certainly no _real_ organization that can stand united VS the wishes of the US – thus much less deter them/you – but what we _can_ and _should_ do is educate, illustrate and prove why said invasion contravened all procedures in place to prevent such a tragedy. And then it is up to each and everyone of us to take a stand against actions such as this one **regardless** of nationality, creed, color and/or gender. [/QUOTE] Sure. But it’s just not the US. I don’t see any calls for the leaders of the UK, Spain or Italy to be brought before any International Court. They weren’t the leaders of the Iraq War, but they were participants. It’s not just the US which is immune. I think most Western Democracies would be granted wide latitude, provided they didn’t lose. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715/20 "2008-03-25T23:22:36Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] …Now, the standards of international law are a bit more fluid – unlike American criminal law, there’s no body of precedent that lays out elements of crimes and standards of proof. But in essaying a fair and even-handed weighing of the evidence, I would say the standard I suggest above would most likely be met: if all the evidence were on the record, and a conviction had happened, a reviewing court would likely conclude that the Bush administration did violate international law, and there was sufficient evidence to uphold such a conviction. [/QUOTE] Leaving aside all of the Clintonesque flailing (IOW, most of your post) hats off for reaching the only logical (and I mean that beyond the _legal_ sense and point to your excoriating of Clinton as an example of what the “law” can and cannot do – which is very little in the latter sense) conclusion that can be reached from a _common sense_ stand-point. Again, cotton-clouds territory, but I really think we could be a better world if we reached for them a bit more often – even if it is not easy and one has to put up a heck of a fight. Thanks for your final honesty all the same. That’s what’s finally given me the respect for you I’ve clearly shown for all these years. Wheat from the chaff, **Bricker** , wheat from the chaff…and FWLIW, you’ve made the cut in fine fashion. Especially considering where you were a short 3/4 years ago. Good on you. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-bush-admin-in-any-way-violated-international-law/442715.md?page=2)