256
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] beardown@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Bush didn't do this. War crimes may have been committed at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib relating to torture and unlawful treatment of prisoners. And murder certainly occurred via Blackwater's massacres. But no targeted extermination of Iraqis as a group occurred.

During the Iraq War under the George W. Bush administration, there were significant allegations and documented instances of war crimes, particularly concerning the treatment of prisoners and the use of torture. However, the term "genocide" is specific and typically refers to acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. There is no consensus or legal finding that genocide occurred during the Iraq War under these definitions.

Regarding war crimes:

  1. Treatment of Prisoners and Torture The most notorious example was the abuse and torture of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, which came to light in 2004. Photographs showing U.S. military personnel abusing and humiliating Iraqi prisoners sparked global outrage. Investigations revealed that the abuses included physical and sexual abuse, torture, rape, sodomy, and murder. These acts were violations of the Geneva Conventions, which protect detainees from inhumane treatment.

  2. Legal Consequences: Some soldiers involved in the Abu Ghraib scandal were court-martialed, convicted, and sentenced to varying terms. However, higher-ranking officials and policymakers were largely not held accountable, leading to widespread criticism and allegations of impunity.

The broader context of the Iraq War includes other allegations of war crimes, such as the use of disproportionate force and illegal weapons.

However, genocide has a precise definition.

The crime of genocide is defined under international law by specific elements that must be present for an act to be legally recognized as genocide. These elements are outlined primarily in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) and are further refined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998). Here are the critical elements:

  1. Intent to Destroy: The perpetrator must have intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such. This is known as the "special intent" or "dolus specialis".

  2. Protected Groups: The targeted group must be identifiable and protected under the Convention, specifically as a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

  3. Prohibited Acts: The Convention specifies the following acts, when committed with intent to destroy a protected group:

    • Killing members of the group.
    • Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.
    • Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction.
    • Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
    • Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The Rome Statute also includes the forcible transfer of a group as an act of genocide when it is intended to destroy the group’s identity.

These elements combine to form the legal framework that courts and international bodies use to determine whether acts constitute genocide, focusing heavily on the perpetrator's intent alongside the nature of the acts committed.

this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
256 points (93.2% liked)

politics

18933 readers
3242 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS