Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 11:15, 2 July 2007 editGATXER (talk \| contribs)106 edits please see mediators comments Criticism to Criticism← Previous edit		Revision as of 12:41, 2 July 2007 edit undoPhilKnight (talk \| contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators125,353 edits →Criticism: merge criticism from content sectionNext edit →
Line 32:		Line 32:
	==Criticism==		==Criticism==
	===Weapons of Mass Destruction and Al-Qaeda===		===Weapons of Mass Destruction and Al-Qaeda===
	{{see\|Iraq and weapons of mass destruction\|Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda\|~~Downing Street memo\|Bush-Blair memo~~\|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq}}		{{see\|Iraq and weapons of mass destruction\|Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda\|\|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq}}

	The arguments ~~put~~ ~~forward~~ ~~for~~ the ]<ref> by Andrea Lynn, the News Bureau of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign</ref> — such as the ~~continued~~ possession ~~and development~~ of weapons of ~~previously used~~ mass destruction and active links to al Qaeda — have ~~been found~~ to be ~~false,~~ ~~according~~ to ~~all~~ ~~official~~ ~~reports~~.<ref>~~Weapons~~ of ~~Mass Destruction~~		The principal arguments used to justify the ]<ref> by Andrea Lynn, the News Bureau of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign</ref> — such as the possession of weapons of mass destruction and active links to al Qaeda — have according to official reports have been found to be incorrect.<ref name="WMD">No weapons of mass destruction
	* ], ] ]		* ], ] ]
	* ], ] ]		* ], ] ]
			* ], ], April 23, 2006
	*See also ]
			* ], May 3, 2006
	* By Joseph Cirincione, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, George Perkovich, with Alexis Orton, ], January 2004 ~~</ref><ref>Link with Al Qaeda~~		* By Joseph Cirincione, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, George Perkovich, with Alexis Orton, ], January 2004
			* ], January 29, 2004
			* ], ], December 14, 2005</ref><ref name="9-11">No relation between Saddan Jussein and al-Qaeda
			* By R. Jeffrey Smith, ], April 6, 2007
	* Documents show Administration claims were exaggerated, by ], ] ]		* Documents show Administration claims were exaggerated, by ], ] ]
	* By Dave Zweifel, The Capital Times		* By Dave Zweifel, The Capital Times
			* CBS, September 8, 2006
⚫	* ]</ref> A report by the Defense Department in 2007 conclusively stated the claimed working relationship with Al Qaeda did not exist. ~~Or,~~ as ~~the~~ ~~Washington~~ Post ~~described~~ ~~it:~~
			* By DOUGLAS JEHL, ], November 6, 2005
⚫	<blockquote>"the intelligence community's prewar consensus that the Iraqi government and al-Qaeda figures had only limited contacts, and ... that reports of deeper links were based on dubious or unconfirmed information."<ref> By R. Jeffrey Smith, W@ashington Post, April 6, 2007</ref></blockquote> The Bush administration ~~advocated~~ ~~that~~ this was due to failure by the intelligence community. However, it ~~has~~ ~~become clear~~ that, prior to the invasion, these arguments had already been widely disputed,<ref name="Ray_McGovern"> ], ] ]</ref> which had purportedly been reported to the U.S. administration. An in-depth investigation into the nature of these discrepancies by the ] ~~has~~ been frustrated. Or, ~~as a~~ ] ~~editorial~~ ~~states:~~
			* ]
	:''Mr. ] (chairman of the Senate panel) tried to kill the investigation entirely, and after the Democrats forced him to proceed, he set rules that seem a lot like the recipe for a whitewash.''<ref> editorial, ''The ]'', ] ]</ref>
			* By Stephen Zunes,], June 29, 2005</ref><ref>Link with Al Qaeda
⚫	~~Sceptics~~ argue that the administration knowingly distorted intelligence reports or ignored contrary information in constructing their case for the war.<ref name="Leaking">Selectively disseminating information
			* Documents show Administration claims were exaggerated, by ], ] ]
			* By Dave Zweifel, The Capital Times
		⚫	* ]</ref> A report by the Defense Department in 2007 conclusively stated the claimed working relationship with Al Qaeda did not exist.<ref> By R. Jeffrey Smith, W@ashington Post, April 6, 2007</ref>

		⚫	The Bush administration initially suggested this was due to failure by the intelligence community. However, it became apparent that, prior to the invasion, these arguments had already been widely disputed,<ref name="Ray_McGovern"> ], ] ]</ref> which had purportedly been reported to the U.S. administration. An in-depth investigation into the nature of these discrepancies by the ] was considered to have been frustrated.<ref> editorial, ''The ]'', ] ]</ref>

			The assertion such weapons posed a threat towards the U.S. was not supported by the available evidence at the time according to subsequent reports.<ref name="NYT"> ] Editorial, November 15, 2005</ref> Weapon inspectors were given access to the alleged weapon factories, despite statements to the contrary by the Bush administration. Continuing these inspections was made impossible by the U.S. led ] which forced the U.N. inspectors out while ignoring their requests for more time.<ref name="Weapons inspectors">Weapons inspectors
			* by Oliver King and Paul Hamilos, ], February 2, 2006
			* by ], ], April 29, 2005</ref>

		⚫	Skeptics argue that the administration knowingly distorted intelligence reports or ignored contrary information in constructing their case for the war.<ref name="Leaking">Selectively disseminating information
	* By Linda Feldmann, The ], ] ]</ref><ref>Misrepresenting the facts surrounding Iraq		* By Linda Feldmann, The ], ] ]</ref><ref>Misrepresenting the facts surrounding Iraq
	*, by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]		*, by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]
Line 50:		Line 65:
	* By ], FindLaw.com, ] ]		* By ], FindLaw.com, ] ]
	* ], ] ]]		* ], ] ]]
	* ] ] </ref> The Downing Street memo and the Bush-Blair memo are used to substantiate that allegation.<ref> Downing Street memo		* ] ] </ref> The ] and the ] are used to substantiate that allegation.<ref> Downing Street memo
	* Posted by ] ] ]		* Posted by ] ] ]
	* DAVID MANNING, ], ] ]		* DAVID MANNING, ], ] ]
	</ref> Congressional Democrats sponsored both a request for documents and a resolution of inquiry.<ref> ] request		</ref> Congressional Democrats sponsored both a request for documents and a resolution of inquiry.<ref> ] request
	* By David Paul, ], ] ]		* By David Paul, ], ] ]
	* Raw Story, ] ]</ref> ~~A report by the Washington Post on ] ], corroborates that view. It states that the~~ Bush administration ~~advocated~~ that two small trailers which had been found in Iraq were "~~biological~~ ~~laboratories~~," despite the fact that U.S. intelligence officials possessed evidence to the contrary at that time.		* Raw Story, ] ]</ref> The Bush administration asserted that two small trailers which had been found in Iraq were "weapons factories," despite the fact that U.S. intelligence officials possessed evidence to the contrary at that time.<ref> By Joby Warrick, The Washington Post, ] ]</ref>

	:''"The three-page field report and a 122-page final report published three weeks later were stamped "secret" and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories."''<ref name="Trailers"> "Biological laboratories"
			The alleged contacts to al-Qaeda were in areas outside of Saddam Hussein's control, and the suggestion Iraq was involved in 9/11 was an allegation for which no evidence existed according to subsequent reports.<ref> By ], ], November 22, 2005</ref>
	* By Joby Warrick, The Washington Post, ] ]</ref>

	===U.N. Charter===		===U.N. Charter===
	{{see\|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq\|UN Charter}}		{{see\|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq\|UN Charter}}

	The UN Charter prohibits any war unless it is out of self-defense or when it is sanctioned by the UN security council. If these requirements are not met international law ~~calls~~ it a ]. ~~Because~~ of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, Senate-ratified treaties such as the ] are "the supreme Law of the Land." ], ] and – professor at ], executive vice president of the ], and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the ] – assert that the Iraq war was not a war in self-defense but a ] contrary to the ] (a ]) and therefore a ].<ref>War of aggression		The UN Charter prohibits any war unless it is out of self-defense or when it is sanctioned by the UN security council. If these requirements are not met international law describes it a ].<ref>Iraq impeachable offense?
			* by John W. Dean, CNN
			* by Marcus Raskin and Joseph A. Vuckovich, ]</ref> Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, Senate-ratified treaties such as the ] are "the supreme Law of the Land." ], ] and – professor at ], executive vice president of the ], and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the ] – assert that the Iraq war was not a war in self-defense but a ] contrary to the ] (a ]) and therefore a ].<ref>War of aggression
	* By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, ] ]		* By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, ] ]
	* By Robert Parry, ], ] ]		* By Robert Parry, ], ] ]
	* By Jan Frel ]]</ref> Also, ] called the war in Iraq a violation of the UN Charter and therefore "illegal." A ~~war~~ of ~~aggression~~ ~~refers~~ to ~~any~~ ~~war~~ ~~not~~ ~~initiated~~ ~~out~~ of ~~self-defence or sanctioned by the UN.~~<ref>~~Iraq impeachable offense?~~		* By Jan Frel ]]</ref> Also, ] called the war in Iraq a violation of the UN Charter and therefore "illegal".<ref name="Humanitarian"> By Ken Roth, ]</ref>
	* by John W. Dean, CNN
	* by Marcus Raskin and Joseph A. Vuckovich, ]</ref>

	==History==		==History==

Revision as of 12:41, 2 July 2007

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This article's factual accuracy is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help to ensure that disputed statements are reliably sourced. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

"Iraq Resolution" and "Iraq War Resolution" are popular names for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, a law passed by the United States Congress in October 2002, authorizing what was soon to become the Iraq War.

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.

Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."

Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."

Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people"

Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt of former President George H. W. Bush, and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War. -

Members of al-Qaeda were "known to be in Iraq."

Iraq's "continu to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight the 9/11 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them.

The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism

Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The Resolution required President Bush's diplomatic efforts at the UN Security Council to "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions." It authorized the United States to use military force to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq." UN members commented it is not up to one member state to interpret and enforce UN resolutions. Subsequently Kofi Anan remarked that these arguments do not constitute the legal requirements set forth in the laws of war prohibiting wars of aggression.

Criticism

Weapons of Mass Destruction and Al-Qaeda

Further information: Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq

The principal arguments used to justify the invasion of Iraq — such as the possession of weapons of mass destruction and active links to al Qaeda — have according to official reports have been found to be incorrect. A report by the Defense Department in 2007 conclusively stated the claimed working relationship with Al Qaeda did not exist.

The Bush administration initially suggested this was due to failure by the intelligence community. However, it became apparent that, prior to the invasion, these arguments had already been widely disputed, which had purportedly been reported to the U.S. administration. An in-depth investigation into the nature of these discrepancies by the Senate Intelligence Committee was considered to have been frustrated.

The assertion such weapons posed a threat towards the U.S. was not supported by the available evidence at the time according to subsequent reports. Weapon inspectors were given access to the alleged weapon factories, despite statements to the contrary by the Bush administration. Continuing these inspections was made impossible by the U.S. led invasion of Iraq which forced the U.N. inspectors out while ignoring their requests for more time.

Skeptics argue that the administration knowingly distorted intelligence reports or ignored contrary information in constructing their case for the war. The Downing Street memo and the Bush-Blair memo are used to substantiate that allegation. Congressional Democrats sponsored both a request for documents and a resolution of inquiry. The Bush administration asserted that two small trailers which had been found in Iraq were "weapons factories," despite the fact that U.S. intelligence officials possessed evidence to the contrary at that time.

The alleged contacts to al-Qaeda were in areas outside of Saddam Hussein's control, and the suggestion Iraq was involved in 9/11 was an allegation for which no evidence existed according to subsequent reports.

U.N. Charter

Further information: Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and UN Charter

The UN Charter prohibits any war unless it is out of self-defense or when it is sanctioned by the UN security council. If these requirements are not met international law describes it a war of aggression. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, Senate-ratified treaties such as the U.N. Charter are "the supreme Law of the Land." John Conyers, Robert Parry and Marjorie Cohn– professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, executive vice president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists – assert that the Iraq war was not a war in self-defense but a war of aggression contrary to the U.N. Charter (a crime against peace) and therefore a war crime. Also, Kofi Annan called the war in Iraq a violation of the UN Charter and therefore "illegal".

History

The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107–243), it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133, and the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16.