Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA crime against peace
How do we use this?
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/03/31/leading-papers-incite-supreme-international-crime
Leading Papers Incite Supreme International Crime
byJim Naureckas
After the New York Times printed John Boltons To Stop Irans Bomb, Bomb Iran (3/26/15; FAIR Blog, 3/26/15), following the Washington Post publishing Joshua Muravchiks War With Iran Is Probably Our Best Option (3/13/15), veteran investigative reporter Robert Parry made an excellent point (Consortium News, 3/28/15):If two major newspapers in, say, Russia published major articles openly advocating the unprovoked bombing of a country, say, Israel, the US government and news media would be aflame with denunciations about aggression, criminality, madness and behavior not fitting the 21st century.
But when the newspapers are American the New York Times and the Washington Post and the target country is Iran, no one in the US government and media bats an eye. These inflammatory articles these incitements to murder and violation of international law are considered just normal discussion in the Land of Exceptionalism.
Advocating for war is not like advocating for most other policies because, as peace activist David Swanson points out, war is a crime. It was outlawed in 1928 by the Kellogg-Briand Pact, in which the United States, the Soviet Union, China, Britain, Germany, France, Japan and 55 other nations condemn[ed] recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce[d] it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 524 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A crime against peace (Original Post)
Skidmore
Apr 2015
OP
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)1. Leaving Bolton aside for the moment --
Every signatory mentioned went on to fight WW2, so whatever pact they signed, however binding it may or may not have been, was abrogated by events. Since then these nations have signed the UN charter and that does recognize war as a means of defense and a remedy for aggression; see Korea and Gulf War 1.
And, while Bolton is overly anxious for war, it is US declared policy that all options are on the table including the use of force. Bolton, however, has no policy making power whereas State Department policy statements reflect the decisions of President Obama.
Thank you for the heads-up. The Fourth Reich/PNAC crew have become unashamed.