The Hypocrisy Is Unbearable: Iraq vs. Crimea, Can You Spot the Difference?

via chycho


Since the hypocrisy of the United States calling for international law to be observed is only lost to the mainstream media, the uber rich, and the bought and paid for low-lives of this society with the attention span of a worm, here is a quickie about Iraq vs. Crimea.

I. Iraq Invasion Was Illegal

The war in Iraq did not end when the United States was kicked out, not by a long shot (2). The violence in Iraq is on the rise and for decades to come we will have to deal with what the United States and its allies have unleashed.

It’s anyone’s guess if those responsible for this war of aggression (crime against peace) will ever be held accountable for their crimes, what we do know, however, is that the decision to invade Iraq has transformed the global political landscape because according to the UN charter, the invasion was illegal:

“Kofi Annan, declared explicitly… 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… 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.’”

[continued at chycho]

17 Comments on "The Hypocrisy Is Unbearable: Iraq vs. Crimea, Can You Spot the Difference?"

  1. Hadrian999 | Mar 18, 2014 at 6:36 pm |

    hearing Biden and Obama talk about international law, Constitutionality, and respect for national sovereignty with a straight face gave me fits of uncontrollable laughter

    • Anarchy Pony | Mar 18, 2014 at 7:03 pm |

      Calling the crimean referendum unconstitutional after the ousting of the president was particularly galling.

  2. Jonas Planck | Mar 18, 2014 at 6:47 pm |

    Boy they SURE get gung-ho when there’s oil or natural gas deposits on the line, don’t they? Oh, I’m sure the fossil fuels have nothing to do with it. They’ll all tell us so. There’s plenty of fossil fuels, the Earth is “aswim” in oil! We’ll never run out! So there’s no reason any nation would EVER go to war just to secure control of any caches of such vital resources. Nope, it’s always altruism and the selfless desire to help our fellow man that makes us spend billions of dollars to blast a country into rubble and seize control of it. Because human beings are just so inherently GOOD.

    • Anarchy Pony | Mar 18, 2014 at 7:02 pm |

      Well this bit is primarily about cutting europe off from russian gas and opening up a new market for u.s. shale gas, which just won’t be profitable without a bigger market.

      • Strangely, I was reading this exactly one year ago:

        “The salience of natural gas as an instrument of state power is emphasized in Russia’s negotiations with Ukraine; this monograph credits the 2006 and 2009 gas wars between the two nations as the main causes for the failure of the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Ultimately, today, Russia uses the same tools it used in Ukraine—in the context of natural gas negotiations—to bribe Western European nations; to divide the NATO Alliance; and to rule over its traditional sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe. Finally, the author emphasizes that with the Russian construction of Nord Stream and South Stream natural gas pipelines, and unless alternatives to Russian natural gas are found, it is only a matter of time until Russia will use natural gas as an instrument of coercion against NATO member states.”

        But I still oppose the Ukrainian junta.

      • Jonas Planck | Mar 18, 2014 at 11:23 pm |

        People desperate not to freeze in the harsh winter can also be considered a valuable resource… the other end of the supply/demand chain…

  3. But, but, Colin Powell and Yellow Cake and here’s a fetus…

  4. If you find the hypocrisy unbearable now, wait until the shooting war starts. There is exponentially more to come.

  5. Adam's Shadow | Mar 18, 2014 at 10:08 pm |

    A lot of this American hypocrisy reminds me of when the U.S. was talking about holding “democratic, free and fair elections” in Iraq. Which, of course, was patent bullshit, because if Muqtada al-Sadr had run for Prime Minister, he most likely would have won an overall majority of the popular vote. The Bush administration would not have tolerated a Shiite, Ayatollah-style religious cleric (with Iranian backing) being the leader of Iraq, but that was a distinct possibility. They would have tried to kick him out.

    Every time I hear the U.S. government or associated talking heads blathering on about “democracy in the Middle East,” my laughing contempt takes over, because a truly democratic, popular majority vote in Arab countries often results in conservative Muslim candidates winning. See: Egypt. When the United States government, regardless of party, talks about “free and fair elections” in such-and-such country, especially one with abundant natural resources and/or brown people, what it really means is a free and fair election as long as a U.S.-friendly candidate wins; otherwise, fuck democracy. See: Chile, 1973. See: Iran, 1953. See: Congo, 1960.

    • Hadrian999 | Mar 18, 2014 at 10:11 pm |

      I wish we would just be honest about being Imperial

      • Adam's Shadow | Mar 18, 2014 at 10:21 pm |

        So do I, in the sense that all this talk about honest, transparent governance would be shown to be more than talk. Sadly, a lot of people in this country would be perfectly supportive of being an Empire and keeping our boot on the neck of much of the planet if they just knew that’s what we were doing; if anything, they would be more supportive of the Empire. I would not, but would applaud the honesty.

  6. Thurlow Weed | Mar 18, 2014 at 11:23 pm |

    Ukraine has a shitty-looking flag, let’s face facts.

  7. jasonpaulhayes | Mar 19, 2014 at 12:30 am |

    This 9sense podcast (segment 2) “Birth of the Great Satan” paints an accurate picture of a nation that always acts in its own best interest, no matter what… and challenged me to view what we do overseas under a different light.

    • Hadrian999 | Mar 19, 2014 at 12:35 am |

      It’s no secret that the U.S. acts in it’s own interest, it always has. Why should it act any other way? the whole World police routine is just a PR mechanism. My problem with it is the dishonesty of it all. International law, The UN, it’s all gilding on the old imperial system. I say if you are going be an empire then embrace it, don’t pretend to be your brothers keeper, it will just make you crazy.

      • jasonpaulhayes | Mar 19, 2014 at 12:56 am |

        Well said and though I do enjoy the witty antics and banter of Ban Ki-Moon it’s my view that the UN will go the way of the League of Nations.

Comments are closed.