It would be nice to believe that the truth will become conventional wisdom before my generation starts falling off the mortal cliff.

Rec

He got us into the Gulf War with Bush 1.

Then he saw how profitable it was and became CEO of Halliburton.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2004/4/28/iraq-war-boosts-halliburton-profits

He then got us into Iraq again with Bush 2.

One immediate action he took was to replace a portion of Army personnel with privatized soldiers from defense contractors. That's one of the reasons we were able to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan for 20 years. Only one percent of Americans are active military. Of those, about 80 percent will never see combat--they are office personnel, photographers, librarians, mechanics, etc. Since fewer and fewer families are directly affected by war, the government can basically keep it going almost in secret.

W. and Blair are still very much alive and could still be tried and if found guilty jailed. I know it won't happen but it should.

He's a war criminal and belongs in prison.

…on prominent Dems welcoming him back into polite society.

Where's KidBerwyn?

...on Iran and his own people. There are plenty of photos of Rumsfield and Saddam meeting in Baghdad during the Iraq/Iran war. Saddam in the end couldn't deliver Iran.

We knew what WMD's he had and knew they were already used up or no longer usable.

Soviet produced satellites images......

Ok

to clear up other readers' potentially thinking that it was a Russian newspaper.

Now, back to business:


Tony Blair should face war crimes tribunal over Iraq war, says Hans Blix

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/tony-blair-should-face-war-crimes-tribunal-over-iraq-war-says-hans-blix-141708751.html

This week marks the 20th anniversary since the beginning of the Iraq War - one of the most controversial conflicts in modern times. On 20 March 2003, the US launched its first airstrikes on the Gulf state - lighting up the skies above Baghdad with an ultra-aggressive "shock and awe" strategy.

Soon after a coalition of American, British, Australian and Polish soldiers marched over the border from Kuwait to execute “Operation Iraqi Freedom”. The US-led coalition invaded largely on the premise of alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) held by Saddam Hussein’s regime, but none were found.

Revelations of faulty intelligence, and in some cases sheer dishonesty, used to justify the eight-year conflict, left many in the West very angry that their countries had been dragged into a war on dubious grounds. Of all the key actors involved in the invasion, one that often generates the most intense reaction is Tony Blair, the prime minister who backed US president George Bush and has since faced criticism and vitriol from many quarters.

Now, the former weapons inspector who was tasked with investigating Iraq's alleged possession of WMDs for the United Nations has spoken out against the former PM. Speaking on MSNBC ahead of the anniversary, Hans Blix said that, "in principle", Blair and Bush should have faced consequences for their invasion - which is now widely regarded as illegal under international law.

snip

That alone justified Desert Storm.

Not sure what IF has to do with that.

Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Hillary, Kerry, Reid and so on.

For those Dems who thought that our leaders not pursuing prosecuting the Bushes, Cheney and Blair was a deal breaker, they left the Party long ago.

You appear to be saying that giving a disputed figure or disposition of Iraqi forces is a "war crime". It's not disputed that Iraq invaded Kuwait.

A complaint that the problem was the dispute over the number of Iraqi tanks close to Saudi Arabia, not that Iraq had invaded Kuwait. That's not about "war crimes".

to Congress and the American people, I would say that is a problem:

On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops led by dictator Saddam Hussein invaded the oil-producing nation of Kuwait. Like Noriega in Panama, Hussein had been a US ally for nearly a decade. From 1980 to 1988, he had killed about 150,000 Iranians, in addition to at least 13,000 of his own citizens. Despite complaints from international human rights groups, however, the Reagan and Bush administrations had treated Hussein as a valuable ally in the US confrontation with Iran. The invasion of Kuwait crossed a line that the Bush Administration could not tolerate. This time, oil was at stake.

The American public was notoriously reluctant to send its young into foreign battles on behalf of any cause. Selling war in the Middle East to the American people would not be easy. Bush would need to convince Americans that former ally Saddam Hussein now embodied evil, and that the oil fiefdom of Kuwait was a struggling young democracy. How could the Bush Administration build US support for "liberating" a country so fundamentally opposed to democratic values? How could the war appear noble and necessary rather than a crass grab to save cheap oil? "If and when a shooting war starts, reporters will begin to wonder why American soldiers are dying for oil-rich sheiks," warned Hal Steward, a retired army PR official. "The US military had better get cracking to come up with a public relations plan that will supply the answers the public can accept."

It is estimated that the government of Kuwait funded as many as 20 PR, law and lobby firms in its campaign to mobilize US opinion and force against Hussein.Participating firms included the Rendon Group, which received a retainer of $100,000 per month for media work, and Neill & Co., which received $50,000 per month for lobbying Congress. Sam Zakhem, a former US ambassador to the oil-rich gulf state of Bahrain, funneled $7.7 million in advertising and lobbying dollars through two front groups, the "Coalition for Americans at Risk" and the "Freedom Task Force." The Coalition, which began in the 1980s as a front for the contras in Nicaragua, prepared and placed TV and newspaper ads, and kept a stable of fifty speakers available for pro-war rallies and publicity events.

Hill & Knowlton, then the world's largest PR firm, served as mastermind for the Kuwaiti campaign. Its activities alone would have constituted the largest foreign-funded campaign ever aimed at manipulating American public opinion. By law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act should have exposed this propaganda campaign to the American people, but the Justice Department chose not to enforce it. Nine days after Saddam's army marched into Kuwait, the Emir's government agreed to fund a contract under which Hill & Knowlton would represent "Citizens for a Free Kuwait," a classic PR front group designed to hide the real role of the Kuwaiti government and its collusion with the Bush administration. Over the next six months, the Kuwaiti government channeled $11.9 million dollars to Citizens for a Free Kuwait, whose only other funding totalled $17,861 from 78 individuals. Virtually all of CFK's budget -- $10.8 million -- went to Hill & Knowlton in the form of fees.

The man running Hill & Knowlton's Washington office was Craig Fuller, one of Bush's closest friends and inside political advisors. The news media never bothered to examine Fuller's role until after the war had ended, but if America's editors had read the PR trade press, they might have noticed this announcement, published in O'Dwyer's PR Services before the fighting began: "Craig L. Fuller, chief of staff to Bush when he was vice-president, has been on the Kuwaiti account at Hill & Knowlton since the first day. He and [Bob] Dilenschneider at one point made a trip to Saudi Arabia, observing the production of some 20 videotapes, among other chores. The Wirthlin Group, research arm of H&K, was the pollster for the Reagan Administration. ... Wirthlin has reported receiving $1.1 million in fees for research assignments for the Kuwaitis. Robert K. Gray, Chairman of H&K/USA based in Washington, DC had leading roles in both Reagan campaigns. He has been involved in foreign nation accounts for many years. ... Lauri J. Fitz-Pegado, account supervisor on the Kuwait account, is a former Foreign Service Officer at the US Information Agency who joined Gray when he set up his firm in 1982."

H&K employed a stunning variety of opinion-forming devices and techniques to help keep US opinion on the side of the Kuwaitis. ... The techniques ranged from full-scale press conferences showing torture and other abuses by the Iraqis to the distribution of tens of thousands of 'Free Kuwait' T-shirts and bumper stickers at college campuses across the US."

Documents filed with the US Department of Justice showed that 119 H&K executives in 12 offices across the US were overseeing the Kuwait account. "The firm's activities, as listed in its report to the Justice Department, included arranging media interviews for visiting Kuwaitis, setting up observances such as National Free Kuwait Day, National Prayer Day (for Kuwait), and National Student Information Day, organizing public rallies, releasing hostage letters to the media, distributing news releases and information kits, contacting politicians at all levels, and producing a nightly radio show in Arabic from Saudi Arabia," wrote Arthur Rowse in the Progressive after the war. Citizens for a Free Kuwait also capitalized on the publication of a quickie 154-page book about Iraqi atrocities titled The Rape of Kuwait, copies of which were stuffed into media kits and then featured on TV talk shows and the Wall Street Journal. The Kuwaiti embassy also bought 200,000 copies of the book for distribution to American troops.

Throughout the campaign, the Wirthlin Group conducted daily opinion polls to help Hill & Knowlton take the emotional pulse of key constituencies so it could identify the themes and slogans that would be most effective in promoting support for US military action. After the war ended, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation produced an Emmy award-winning TV documentary on the PR campaign titled "To Sell a War." The show featured an interview with Wirthlin executive Dee Alsop in which Alsop bragged of his work and demonstrated how audience surveys were even used to physically adapt the clothing and hairstyle of the Kuwait ambassador so he would seem more likable to TV audiences. Wirthlin's job, Alsop explained, was "to identify the messages that really resonate emotionally with the American people." The theme that struck the deepest emotional chord, they discovered, was "the fact that Saddam Hussein was a madman who had committed atrocities even against his own people, and had tremendous power to do further damage, and he needed to be stopped."

In the case of the Gulf War, the "hook" was invented by Hill & Knowlton. In style, substance and mode of delivery, it bore an uncanny resemblance to England's World War I hearings that accused German soldiers of killing babies.

MacArthur also noticed another telling detail about the October 1990 hearings: "The Human Rights Caucus is not a committee of congress, and therefore it is unencumbered by the legal accouterments that would make a witness hesitate before he or she lied. ... Lying under oath in front of a congressional committee is a crime; lying from under the cover of anonymity to a caucus is merely public relations."

In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on October 10 came from a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah. According to the Caucus, Nayirah's full name was being kept confidential to prevent Iraqi reprisals against her family in occupied Kuwait. Sobbing, she described what she had seen with her own eyes in a hospital in Kuwait City. Her written testimony was passed out in a media kit prepared by Citizens for a Free Kuwait. "I volunteered at the al-Addan hospital," Nayirah said. "While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where ... babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die."Three months passed between Nayirah's testimony and the start of the war. During those months, the story of babies torn from their incubators was repeated over and over again. President Bush told the story. It was recited as fact in Congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. "Of all the accusations made against the dictator," MacArthur observed, "none had more impact on American public opinion than the one about Iraqi soldiers removing 312 babies from their incubators and leaving them to die on the cold hospital floors of Kuwait City."
At the Human Rights Caucus, however, Hill & Knowlton failed to reveal that Nayirah was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait's Ambassador to the US, who sat listening in the hearing room during her testimony. The Caucus also failed to reveal that H&K vice-president Lauri Fitz-Pegado had coached Nayirah in what even the Kuwaitis' own investigators later confirmed was false testimony.
If Nayirah's outrageous lie had been exposed at the time it was told, it might have at least caused some in Congress and the news media to soberly reevaluate the extent to which they were being skillfully manipulated to support military action. Public opinion was deeply divided on Bush's Gulf policy. As late as December 1990, a New York Times/CBS News poll indicated that 48 percent of the American people wanted Bush to wait before taking any action if Iraq failed to withdraw from Kuwait by Bush's January 15 deadline. On January 12, the US Senate voted by a narrow, five-vote margin to support the Bush administration in a declaration of war. Given the narrowness of the vote, the babies-thrown-from-incubators story may have turned the tide in Bush's favor.

Following the war, human rights investigators attempted to confirm Nayirah's story and could find no witnesses or other evidence to support it. Amnesty International, which had fallen for the story, was forced to issue an embarrassing retraction. Nayirah herself was unavailable for comment. "This is the first allegation I've had that she was the ambassador's daughter," said Human Rights Caucus co-chair John Porter. "Yes, I think people ... were entitled to know the source of her testimony." When journalists for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation asked Nasir al-Sabah for permission to question Nayirah about her story, the ambassador angrily refused.

https://www.prwatch.org/node/25/print

In conclusion, Ben Franklin cautioned of religion “When a religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself….it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

I will substitute the word “war”:

“When a war is good (justifiable?), I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself, so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of a PR firm, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

Or, Thomas Jefferson “it is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”

Making Jefferson’s quote applicable to the first Gulf War:

“it is error alone which needs the support of PR firms. Truth can stand by itself.”

Americans were deceived; lives were lost. Period.

Suggested reading: Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War by John R. MacArthur

The rest of the world supported the coalition without ever hearing the "incubators" story. It's just a reflection on American media that they thought they needed something like that to get people to think about foreign policy.

Why do you keep bypassing the fact that PR firms were paid to lie in order to get support for the war?

No one else heard about it. It's not a war crime to lie to the American public.

Are you actually clear on what a war crime is? Do you just use the term for "something to do with a war that my government shouldn't have done"?

or whatever else.

Read "Second Front" by John R. MacArthur.

If this was such a justified war, tons of money should not have been paid to PR firms to get people to support it. (If the whole world was supposedly on board).

the right decision.

if there is one.

Hope the whole Bush clan is there and they can hang with TFG and his brood.

Ben Franklin cautioned of religion “When a religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself….it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

I will substitute the word “war”:

“When a war is good (justifiable?), I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself, so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of a PR firm, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

Or, Thomas Jefferson “it is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”

Making Jefferson’s quote applicable to the first Gulf War:

“it is error alone which needs the support of PR firms. Truth can stand by itself.”

Americans were deceived; lives were lost. Period.

Suggested reading: Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War by John R. MacArthur