Acts Of War Approved At Highest Levels
Rice Says Bush Authorized Iranians’ Arrest in Iraq
It would appear that the violation of international law that occurred in two separate raids of Iranian diplomatic facilities in Iraq was authorized by President Bush directly. The seizure of computers, papers and the detention of Iranian diplomats (most of whom were released) during these raids constituted additional breaches of law.
Since the US is a signatory of the UN Charter and the various treaties--all of which were ratified by congress--governing the treatment of diplomats, diplomatic facilities and diplomatic communications (including papers and computers), the violation of these laws are in fact a violation of our Constitution.
When will the impeachment begin? Will there be war crime trials where Bush and others will be held accountable? Regardless of the rationale for these raids, the rule of law and the standards of our own Constitution must be our concern in these matters. Yes, we have a right to protect US interests and prevent terrorism, but such cannot be the grounds for our actions in Iraq as it is a sovereign state with a recognized and duly elected government. We have no authority or right to seize Iranian citizens traveling in, around or through Iraq unless they are overtly committing acts of aggression (specific acts of war). Even as an occupying force, we do not have the authority to detain diplomats or raid diplomatic facilities without the consent and direct cooperation of the host nation.
While Secretary Rice hedged on naming Bush directly, her involvement in the process demonstrates that the authority to conduct these raids came directly from the president. When we add up all of the offenses against our Constitution, there is no doubt that Bush needs to be impeached. It does not matter what his motivations or intentions are in these matters because our Constitution requires that he adhere to his oath of office, which specifically requires him to faithfully execute his office in full compliance to it. He cannot ignore the parts of our supreme law he does not like merely because he perceives a terrorist threat. He must use a process, even in the conduct of hostilities authorized by congress, that is consistent with the Constitution. Failure to follow the rule of law is a failure to hold to his oath.
It is further the responsibility of every military officer, and every member of congress, to comply with the Constitution and assure that unconstitutional acts and orders are not executed. Therefore, Vice President Cheney is also responsible for these breaches and should be impeached as well. Secretary Gates has committed a crime by conveying the order to the military commanders and Secretary Rice is guilty as well. How much more of this bullshit will we tolerate before we act?
It would appear that the violation of international law that occurred in two separate raids of Iranian diplomatic facilities in Iraq was authorized by President Bush directly. The seizure of computers, papers and the detention of Iranian diplomats (most of whom were released) during these raids constituted additional breaches of law.
Since the US is a signatory of the UN Charter and the various treaties--all of which were ratified by congress--governing the treatment of diplomats, diplomatic facilities and diplomatic communications (including papers and computers), the violation of these laws are in fact a violation of our Constitution.
When will the impeachment begin? Will there be war crime trials where Bush and others will be held accountable? Regardless of the rationale for these raids, the rule of law and the standards of our own Constitution must be our concern in these matters. Yes, we have a right to protect US interests and prevent terrorism, but such cannot be the grounds for our actions in Iraq as it is a sovereign state with a recognized and duly elected government. We have no authority or right to seize Iranian citizens traveling in, around or through Iraq unless they are overtly committing acts of aggression (specific acts of war). Even as an occupying force, we do not have the authority to detain diplomats or raid diplomatic facilities without the consent and direct cooperation of the host nation.
While Secretary Rice hedged on naming Bush directly, her involvement in the process demonstrates that the authority to conduct these raids came directly from the president. When we add up all of the offenses against our Constitution, there is no doubt that Bush needs to be impeached. It does not matter what his motivations or intentions are in these matters because our Constitution requires that he adhere to his oath of office, which specifically requires him to faithfully execute his office in full compliance to it. He cannot ignore the parts of our supreme law he does not like merely because he perceives a terrorist threat. He must use a process, even in the conduct of hostilities authorized by congress, that is consistent with the Constitution. Failure to follow the rule of law is a failure to hold to his oath.
It is further the responsibility of every military officer, and every member of congress, to comply with the Constitution and assure that unconstitutional acts and orders are not executed. Therefore, Vice President Cheney is also responsible for these breaches and should be impeached as well. Secretary Gates has committed a crime by conveying the order to the military commanders and Secretary Rice is guilty as well. How much more of this bullshit will we tolerate before we act?
A recent series of American raids against Iranians in Iraq was authorized under an order that President Bush decided to issue several months ago to undertake a broad military offensive against Iranian operatives in the country, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday.
“There has been a decision to go after these networks,” Ms. Rice said in an interview with The New York Times in her office on Friday afternoon, before leaving on a trip to the Middle East.
Ms. Rice said Mr. Bush had acted “after a period of time in which we saw increasing activity” among Iranians in Iraq, “and increasing lethality in what they were producing.” She was referring to what American military officials say is evidence that many of the most sophisticated improvised explosive devices, or I.E.D.’s, being used against American troops were made in Iran.
Ms. Rice was vague on the question of when Mr. Bush issued the order, but said his decision grew out of questions that the president and members of his National Security Council raised in the fall.
The administration has long accused Iran of meddling in Iraq, providing weapons and training to Shiite forces with the idea of keeping the United States bogged down in the war. Ms. Rice’s willingness to discuss the issue seemed to reflect a new hostility to Iran that was first evident in Mr. Bush’s speech to the nation on Wednesday night, in which he accused Tehran of providing material support for attacks on American troops and vowed to respond.
Until now, despite a series of raids in which Iranians have been seized by American forces in Baghdad and other cities in Iraq, administration officials have declined to say whether Mr. Bush ordered such actions.
The White House decision to authorize the aggressive steps against Iranians in Iraq appears to formalize the American effort to contain Iran’s ambitions as a new front in the Iraq war. Administration officials now describe Iran as the single greatest threat the United States faces in the Middle East, though some administration critics regard the talk about Iran as a diversion, one intended to shift attention away from the spiraling chaos in Iraq.
In adopting a more confrontational approach toward Iran, Mr. Bush has decisively rejected recommendations of the Iraq Study Group that he explore negotiations with Tehran as part of a new strategy to help quell the sectarian violence in Iraq.
In the interview on Friday, Ms. Rice described the military effort against Iranians in Iraq as a defensive “force protection mission,” but said it was also motivated by concerns that Iran was trying to further destabilize the country.
Mr. Bush’s public warning to Iran was accompanied by the deployment of an additional aircraft carrier off Iran’s coast and advanced Patriot antimissile defense systems in Persian Gulf countries near Iran’s borders. Both the White House and the secretary of defense, Robert M. Gates, insisted Friday that the United States was not seeking to goad Iran into conflict, and that it had no intention of taking the battle into Iranian territory. The White House spokesman, Tony Snow, warned reporters away from “an urban legend that’s going around” that Mr. Bush was “trying to prepare the way for war” with Iran or Syria.
Mr. Gates said that the United States did not intend to engage in hot pursuit of the operatives into Iran.
“We believe that we can interrupt these networks that are providing support, through actions inside the territory of Iraq, that there is no need to attack targets in Iran itself,” Mr. Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I continue to believe what I told you at the confirmation hearing,” he added, referring to last month’s hearings on his nomination, “that any kind of military action inside Iran itself would be a very last resort.”
Ms. Rice’s comments came just a day after the new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, issued a sharp warning to the administration about the recent raids against Iranians in Iraq, including one in Erbil early Thursday.
He said the vote to authorize the president to order the use of force to topple Saddam Hussein was not a vehicle for mounting attacks in Iran, even to pursue cells or networks assisting insurgents or sectarian militias. “I just want the record to show — and I would like to have a legal response from the State Department if they think they have authority to pursue networks or anything else across the border into Iran and Iraq — that will generate a constitutional confrontation here in the Senate, I predict to you,” Mr. Biden said.
In the view of American officials, Iran is engaged in a policy of “managed chaos” in Iraq. Its presumed goal, both policymakers and intelligence officials say, is to raise the cost to the United States for its intervention in Iraq, in hopes of teaching Washington a painful lesson about the perils of engaging in regime change.
Toward this end, American officials charge, Iran has provided components, including explosives and infrared triggering devices, for sophisticated roadside bombs that are designed to penetrate armor. They have also provided training for several thousand Shiite militia fighters, mostly in Iran. Officials say the training is carried out by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security.
In the interview on Friday, Ms. Rice said, “We think they are providing help to the militias as well, and maybe even the more violent element of these militias.”
In addition, American officials say the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force is active in Iraq. A senior military official said last week that one of the Iranians seized in Baghdad late last month was the No. 3 Quds official. He said American forces uncovered maps of neighborhoods in Baghdad in which Sunnis could be evicted, and evidence of involvement in the war during the summer in Lebanon.
That Iranian official was ordered released, by Ms. Rice among others, after Iran claimed he had diplomatic status.
This week, American forces in Iraq conducted at least two raids against suspected Iranian operatives, including the raid in Erbil. The United States is currently detaining several individuals with Iranian passports who were picked up in those raids. The Iranians have said that they were in the process of establishing a consulate, but American officials said that the Erbil operation was a liaison office and that the workers there did not have diplomatic passports.
A defense official said Friday that such raids would continue. “We are going to be more aggressive,” he said, referring to the suspected Iranian operatives. “We are going to look for them and to try to do what we can to get them into custody.”
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home