General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWould an attack on Syria meet your criteria for war crimes, or not?
If there is no Congressional or UN approval for attacking Syria, and we attack anyway, will that constitute a war crime in your opinion?
5 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
Congress must approve, but not necessarily the UN, or it's a war crime. | |
2 (40%) |
|
The UN must approve, by not necessarily Congress, or it's a war crime. | |
0 (0%) |
|
Both Congress and the UN must approve, or it's a war crime. | |
1 (20%) |
|
It wouldn't be a war crime, regardless of approval. | |
1 (20%) |
|
It would be a "war crime" even with approval. | |
0 (0%) |
|
Some other condition. | |
1 (20%) |
|
0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
Scuba
(53,475 posts)DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)Strange logic... seems to dismiss all of written history.
leftstreet
(36,111 posts)DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)Meaning no matter what, it is criminal.
I think this is a serious matter. The American public is in no mood to go to more war in the Middle East, that is clear.
But if ANY country is using chemical weapons on civilians, we can't stand by and just watch. It would be criminal to do nothing.
Absolute proof is needed. The UN seems to have it. When you have women and children found dead in the street with foaming mouths, and no bullet wounds... test can verify very easily is chemical weapons were used.
leftstreet
(36,111 posts)Not 'all war always,' but criminal in Syria even with Congressional and UN approval
That's how I took it anyway
DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)I voted for Congressional approval as required.
I just pointed out that I find it strange, that is Congress approves a retaliation, someone here on DU wants to prosecute (I am guessing politician, or soldiers???) with war crimes????
I guess some people believe they are morally higher than our Judicial AND Legislative system.
leftstreet
(36,111 posts)Technically a 'war crime' occurs only during conflict, and unless I've missed something the US/Syria aren't engaged
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)But that's not a war crime.
It would be a violation of international law to attack without UN approval.
But that's not a war crime either.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Haven't you all learned anything since then?
Absent an actual genocide: stay the fuck out of other people's business.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)It could be an aggressive war, which would be a crime against humanity or something, but a war crime is, to me at least, a crime in the conduct of a war.
Launching Tomahawk cruise missiles at military or government targets seems not to be a war crime. We've done plenty of it without it ever being the most controversial part of whatever we're up to at the time.
But it is most assuredly war.
atreides1
(16,091 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I'm not trying to straw or red herring --
Are you asking if an attack on Syria would be a war crime? As opposed to what? The crimes that have happened WRT to chemical weapons?
Who is the attacker that you are thinking about in your question? Is it the United States? (I'm under the impression you are referring the USA when you say 'we'.)
You leave nothing that I can vote for or against in your poll.