I doubt Bush can travel abroad much like Kissinger is restricted.
The War on Terror
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Terrorism maybe?
Can we declare terrorism on war?
As far as I'm aware, there is no comprehensive definition of terrorism under international law and it is certain specific offences that are outlawed, and these relate to non-state actors.
Under which section of international law do you think they should be charged? I thought you were going to go down the war-crimes route, though I am not sure that any could be convincingly tied back to the heads of state in this case.
I'm no lawyer of international law and don't feel able to make pronouncements on what is and isn't illegal. As far as I've read, the legality of the decision to go to war in recent conflicts is disputed by expert lawyers. What you need to recognise is that the legality or otherwise of an action is not the same thing as it being morally correct. For example, it is legal to cheat on your partner, but it doesn't make it morally right. To me it would make much more sense for people to talk about whether a war was right or not, rather than to go down the convoluted and confusing legal route. Talking of legality doesn't address that issue, and most people who bring it up are not qualified to talk about it with any authority.
Legality, like the interpretation of 'terrorism' is subjective. It depends on which you global cohort you associate yourself with: certain states and organisations deemed 'rogue' by would not doubt be regarded illegitimate and their actions terrorist, whereas when its the likes of the US, EU, Nato etc....its instead modulated as 'humanitarian intervention'. International law is so distorted in this day and age its impossible to impose any consistent, universal stance in challenging legality.
Going down the 'war crimes' route is equally hopeless. The US's UN vetoing power means that the US, along with its allies and client states are essentially immune from any allegations involving war crimes and the like.
Lucky for Bush and Blair, they were comrades of the cohort representing the interests of 'humanitarian intervention'.
There's no broadly accepted definition of Terrorism anywhere. Even in the US, there are different branches within the Government who define Terrorism differently - The FBI, CIA, DIA, State Department, Defense Department etc. Its comparably undefinable in other parts of the world as well.
Which is why I always find it surprising people say things like 'illegal war', who is to say it was? And it's not all that relevant to the point people are typically trying to make, which is that it was an immoral war - that's a different thing.
Well let's take the official definitions from some of the departments you've mentioned:
FBI:
CIA:
State Department:
Defense Department:
Using any of those definitions as a platform, it would indeed classify both Bush and Blair as international terrorists. Not only that, it would label the United States as the biggest terrorist nation since 1980, with the EU and Nato not far behind.
That's the problem, the definition is twisted and modulated to include and exclude depending on who your clients are, and who the nemesis is on political terms. The term 'humanitarian intervention' is used excessively to mask and divert any allegations aimed at the US and it's allies.
You're right, personally I see it being rather odd that a concept such as war itself is deemed 'illegal', it is what it is. I think however the allegations that deem it illegal comes from the fact that it hadn't received UN backing, but yet again how many wars do?
'Immoral War' is certainly what it was though - laying suffering upon a whole nation, while undermining the security of your own civilians just to impose a dominance in the region and ensure tighter controls over regional oil. You could also argue it was a war fought for certain allies too.
We live in Orwellian times.
So much freedom sacrificed in order to get to these horrible threats to our freedom. The ironing is delicious.
So much freedom sacrificed in order to get to these horrible threats to our freedom. The ironing is delicious.
Its pointless to try and marry conflicting definitions of what is really an undefinable pejorative. If the US can't agree on identical language within its respective agencies, then just think how difficult it would be for the International community to do the same.
There really isn't much to distinguish the definitions though. Besides, the irony stems from the fact that they themselves are guilty of the very definitions they use to label certain states or factions.
First of all, this isn't about bashing soldiers or the US(I have a vested interest in both)....and War makes good people do all kinds of horrible things.
But some things still bother you....
Pictures and stories like this still bother me.....
The people in question in this case will be punished(to different degrees) and the abuse/murder of innocents isn't exactly the exclusive domain of the US military...the Taliban after all are still in the neighborhood.
But the question remains....
Why? Is it simply people so sick and tired of a country, and an unseen enemy that everyone becomes the enemy? The 'enemy' are no longer human beings, so they are sport?
But some things still bother you....
Pictures and stories like this still bother me.....
The people in question in this case will be punished(to different degrees) and the abuse/murder of innocents isn't exactly the exclusive domain of the US military...the Taliban after all are still in the neighborhood.
But the question remains....
Why? Is it simply people so sick and tired of a country, and an unseen enemy that everyone becomes the enemy? The 'enemy' are no longer human beings, so they are sport?
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-admi...n-prisoners-20120507-1y90y.html#ixzz1uD7UOHdG
No real surprises...but further confirmation of how tough this whole thing has been.
It's over. Can we have our freedoms back, please?
You're Canadian, what use is freedom to you? You'll only use it to buy guns, and then add insult to injury by not even using them, instead clubbing your baby seals to death with broom handles.
Al Qaeda Bomb Plot Against US-Bound Jet Reportedly Foiled
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/al-qaeda-bomb-plot-foiled_n_1497734.html
WASHINGTON — The CIA thwarted an ambitious plot by al-Qaida's affiliate in Yemen to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner using a bomb with a sophisticated new design around the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden, U.S. officials said Monday.
The plot involved an upgrade of the underwear bomb that failed to detonate aboard a jetliner over Detroit on Christmas 2009. The new bomb was also designed to be used in a passenger's underwear, but this time al-Qaida developed a more refined detonation system, U.S. officials said. The new underwear bomb was "similar" enough to the failed 2009 device that current security measures would have prevented it from bringing down an airplane, said a senior Department of Homeland Security official, who spoke on the condition of not being named.
The FBI is examining the bomb to see whether it could have passed through airport security, officials said. They said the device did not contain metal, meaning it probably could have passed through an airport metal detector. But it was not clear whether new body scanners used in many airports would have detected it.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday that she had been briefed about an "undetectable" device that was "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner."
There were no immediate plans to change security procedures at U.S. airports.
The would-be suicide bomber, based in Yemen, had not yet picked a target or bought a plane ticket when the CIA stepped in and seized the bomb, officials said. It's not immediately clear what happened to the alleged bomber.
White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said President Barack Obama learned about the plot in April and was assured the device posed no threat to the public.
"The president thanks all intelligence and counterterrorism professionals involved for their outstanding work and for serving with the extraordinary skill and commitment that their enormous responsibilities demand," Hayden said.
The operation unfolded even as the White House and Department of Homeland Security assured the American public that they knew of no al-Qaida plots against the U.S. around the anniversary of bin Laden's death. The operation was carried out over the past few weeks, officials said.
"We have no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the anniversary of bin Laden's death," White House press secretary Jay Carney said on April 26.
On May 1, the Department of Homeland Security said, "We have no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the U.S. tied to the one-year anniversary of bin Laden's death."
The White House did not explain those statements Monday.
Matthew Chandler, a Homeland Security spokesman, reiterated statements on Monday that it had "no specific, credible information regarding an active terrorist plot against the U.S. at this time, although we continue to monitor efforts by al-Qa'ida and its affiliates to carry out terrorist attacks, both in the Homeland and abroad.
"Since this IED (improvised explosive device) demonstrates our adversaries' interest in targeting the aviation sector, DHS continues, at the direction of the President, to employ a risk-based, layered approach to ensure the security of the traveling public. These layers include threat and vulnerability analysis, prescreening and screening of passengers, using the best available technology, random searches at airports, federal air marshal coverage and additional security measures both seen and unseen. DHS will continue to work with our federal, state, local, international and private sector partners to identify potential threats and take appropriate protective measures. As always, we encourage law enforcement and security officials, as well as the general public, to maintain vigilance and report suspicious activity to the appropriate authorities."
The AP learned about the thwarted plot last week but agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way. Once officials said those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security acknowledged the existence of the bomb late Monday, but there were no immediate plans to adjust security procedures at airports. Other officials, who were briefed on the operation, insisted on anonymity to discuss details of the plot, many of which the U.S. has not officially acknowledged.
"The device never presented a threat to public safety, and the U.S. government is working closely with international partners to address associated concerns with the device," the FBI said in a statement.
It's not clear who built the bomb, but, because of its sophistication and its similarity to the Christmas bomb, counterterrorism officials suspected it was the work of master bomb maker Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri or one of his protégées. Al-Asiri constructed the first underwear bomb and two others that al-Qaida built into printer cartridges and shipped to the U.S. on cargo planes in 2010.
Both of those bombs used a powerful industrial explosive. Both were nearly successful.
The operation is an intelligence victory for the United States and a reminder of al-Qaida's ambitions, despite the death of bin Laden and other senior leaders. Because of instability in the Yemeni government, the terrorist group's branch there has gained territory and strength. It has set up terrorist camps and, in some areas, even operates as a de facto government.
But along with the gains there also have been losses. The group has suffered significant setbacks as the CIA and the U.S. military focus more on Yemen. On Sunday, Fahd al-Quso, a senior al-Qaida leader, was hit by a missile as he stepped out of his vehicle along with another operative in the southern Shabwa province of Yemen.
Al-Quso, 37, was on the FBI's most wanted list, with a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture. He was indicted in the U.S. for his role in the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in the harbor of Aden, Yemen, in which 17 American sailors were killed and 39 injured.
Al-Quso was believed to have replaced Anwar al-Awlaki as the group's head of external operations. Al-Awlaki was killed in a U.S. airstrike last year.
___
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/al-qaeda-bomb-plot-foiled_n_1497734.html
WASHINGTON — The CIA thwarted an ambitious plot by al-Qaida's affiliate in Yemen to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner using a bomb with a sophisticated new design around the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden, U.S. officials said Monday.
The plot involved an upgrade of the underwear bomb that failed to detonate aboard a jetliner over Detroit on Christmas 2009. The new bomb was also designed to be used in a passenger's underwear, but this time al-Qaida developed a more refined detonation system, U.S. officials said. The new underwear bomb was "similar" enough to the failed 2009 device that current security measures would have prevented it from bringing down an airplane, said a senior Department of Homeland Security official, who spoke on the condition of not being named.
The FBI is examining the bomb to see whether it could have passed through airport security, officials said. They said the device did not contain metal, meaning it probably could have passed through an airport metal detector. But it was not clear whether new body scanners used in many airports would have detected it.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday that she had been briefed about an "undetectable" device that was "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner."
There were no immediate plans to change security procedures at U.S. airports.
The would-be suicide bomber, based in Yemen, had not yet picked a target or bought a plane ticket when the CIA stepped in and seized the bomb, officials said. It's not immediately clear what happened to the alleged bomber.
White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said President Barack Obama learned about the plot in April and was assured the device posed no threat to the public.
"The president thanks all intelligence and counterterrorism professionals involved for their outstanding work and for serving with the extraordinary skill and commitment that their enormous responsibilities demand," Hayden said.
The operation unfolded even as the White House and Department of Homeland Security assured the American public that they knew of no al-Qaida plots against the U.S. around the anniversary of bin Laden's death. The operation was carried out over the past few weeks, officials said.
"We have no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the anniversary of bin Laden's death," White House press secretary Jay Carney said on April 26.
On May 1, the Department of Homeland Security said, "We have no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the U.S. tied to the one-year anniversary of bin Laden's death."
The White House did not explain those statements Monday.
Matthew Chandler, a Homeland Security spokesman, reiterated statements on Monday that it had "no specific, credible information regarding an active terrorist plot against the U.S. at this time, although we continue to monitor efforts by al-Qa'ida and its affiliates to carry out terrorist attacks, both in the Homeland and abroad.
"Since this IED (improvised explosive device) demonstrates our adversaries' interest in targeting the aviation sector, DHS continues, at the direction of the President, to employ a risk-based, layered approach to ensure the security of the traveling public. These layers include threat and vulnerability analysis, prescreening and screening of passengers, using the best available technology, random searches at airports, federal air marshal coverage and additional security measures both seen and unseen. DHS will continue to work with our federal, state, local, international and private sector partners to identify potential threats and take appropriate protective measures. As always, we encourage law enforcement and security officials, as well as the general public, to maintain vigilance and report suspicious activity to the appropriate authorities."
The AP learned about the thwarted plot last week but agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way. Once officials said those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security acknowledged the existence of the bomb late Monday, but there were no immediate plans to adjust security procedures at airports. Other officials, who were briefed on the operation, insisted on anonymity to discuss details of the plot, many of which the U.S. has not officially acknowledged.
"The device never presented a threat to public safety, and the U.S. government is working closely with international partners to address associated concerns with the device," the FBI said in a statement.
It's not clear who built the bomb, but, because of its sophistication and its similarity to the Christmas bomb, counterterrorism officials suspected it was the work of master bomb maker Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri or one of his protégées. Al-Asiri constructed the first underwear bomb and two others that al-Qaida built into printer cartridges and shipped to the U.S. on cargo planes in 2010.
Both of those bombs used a powerful industrial explosive. Both were nearly successful.
The operation is an intelligence victory for the United States and a reminder of al-Qaida's ambitions, despite the death of bin Laden and other senior leaders. Because of instability in the Yemeni government, the terrorist group's branch there has gained territory and strength. It has set up terrorist camps and, in some areas, even operates as a de facto government.
But along with the gains there also have been losses. The group has suffered significant setbacks as the CIA and the U.S. military focus more on Yemen. On Sunday, Fahd al-Quso, a senior al-Qaida leader, was hit by a missile as he stepped out of his vehicle along with another operative in the southern Shabwa province of Yemen.
Al-Quso, 37, was on the FBI's most wanted list, with a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture. He was indicted in the U.S. for his role in the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in the harbor of Aden, Yemen, in which 17 American sailors were killed and 39 injured.
Al-Quso was believed to have replaced Anwar al-Awlaki as the group's head of external operations. Al-Awlaki was killed in a U.S. airstrike last year.
___
Red Dreams, some interesting details on the story in your post
The ruling secular and socialist govt of afghanistan invited the soviets to come in and save them from uneducated religious militants being funded by none other than usa (shocker!).
Afghanistan under the socialist govt:
...interesting and scary.
no metal detonators....
if just one gets through.....!!!
intelligence seems the only way to stop this it seems atm.
the ruling secular and socialist govt of afghanistan invited the soviets to come in and save them from uneducated religious militants being funded by none other than usa (shocker!).
afghanistan under the socialist govt:
I see you've come to terms that Afghanistan was a cold war proxy scurmish between the Americans and Soviets. Very good.
First of all, this isn't about bashing soldiers or the US(I have a vested interest in both)....and War makes good people do all kinds of horrible things.
But some things still bother you....
Pictures and stories like this still bother me.....
The people in question in this case will be punished(to different degrees) and the abuse/murder of innocents isn't exactly the exclusive domain of the US military...the Taliban after all are still in the neighborhood.
But the question remains....
Why? Is it simply people so sick and tired of a country, and an unseen enemy that everyone becomes the enemy? The 'enemy' are no longer human beings, so they are sport?
Cant even lie, obviously not all soldiers do this, but its shit like this why i can bring myself to respect them the way others do.
International laws protecting civilians in wartime are “no longer relevant,” Dooley continues. And that opens the possibility of applying “the historical precedents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki” to Islam’s holiest cities, and bringing about “Mecca and Medina['s] destruction.”
What can you even say? There are some truly terrifying people on both sides.
What can you even say? There are some truly terrifying people on both sides.
"Facilitate the self-destruction"??
Its not really self-destruction then.
Its not really self-destruction then.
You've got to stop saying GWOT, I beg you.
What's wrong with it? It's the official abbreviation.
Last edited:
Your constant use of "GWOT" really doesn't do you any favor.
@AfonsoAlves
I am also confused by the upset over someone using the official abbreviation of a war’s name.
I am also confused by the upset over someone using the official abbreviation of a war’s name.
Why? It's literally the official documented abbreviation, found in practically every single Congressional, DoD and Executive document on the matter.
What’s offensive about saying GWOT? And more to the point, what does it even stand for? Something war on terror?
Got it, thanks. I’m not sure why there would be either.
Is it still used now? It was never anything more than catch-all political phrasing for various military operations enacted without an actual declaration of war by the states involved. No different to the "War on Drugs" in terms of phrasing.
No, it wasn't just a political catchphrase.
People who were in service at the start all received a GWOT-SM medal
Servicemen who were deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan received the GWOT-E medal.
Term is still being used on official media postings, documents and such as of late 2024
Also, clearly was not just a slogan given it appears on state department, DoD and congressional docs and briefings EVERYWHERE. Even the department of Health uses GWOT when referring to medical treatment for soldiers deployed in the middle east.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-06-885T/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-06-885T.htm
https://www.gao.gov/assets/a287182.html
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38150398/
It was a catchphrase that only the US use as far as I'm aware. They should have given out proper medals with Afghanistan and/or Iraq embossed on them, rather than a some conceptual war slogan.
Going well of topic here. Quote this in another thread to discuss if anyone is bothered.
Whilst official only in the US context, most Coalition forces who were in Afghanistan/Iraq use in colloquially when referring to operations from 2001 to pre-Afghan withdrawal. Mainly because most non-American servicemen had to spend a lot of time with Americans under joint command.
I use GWOT and I'm not American.
But I still haven't had the question answered? Why is using GWOT a problem?
Gwot is an ugly acronym for an ugly campaign, to borrow from Madeleine Albright.
GWOT is a politically invented term to justify military action against anyone that falls under a certain umbrella in the eyes of the US. You can't declare war on a tactic and you shouldn't be sticking it on campaign medals.