Earth: 248 armed conflicts after WW2; US started 201 (81%), killing 30 million so far. Arrests are when now?

hat tip: Washington’s Blog and David Swanson

People around the world view the US as the greatest threat to peace; voted three times more dangerous than any other country. The data confirm this conclusion:

The categories of crime for armed attacks outside US treaty limits of law are:

  1. Wars of Aggression (the worst crime a nation can commit),
  2. likely treason for lying to US military, ordering unlawful attack and invasions of foreign lands, and causing thousands of US military deaths.

Americans can demand arrests of its “leaders” for such Emperor’s New Clothes-like obvious crimes, refuse any orders to unlawful wars, and participate as they see best with like-minded allies.

One option with three talking points is the 2014 Worldwide Wave of Action (and here), begun on the April 4 anniversary of Martin King’s assassination by the US government (civil court trial verdict) and completing ~July 4 (Martin’ 2-minute plea to you).

Purpose of this operation:

The good news is that victory, when it comes, will come in a relative instant. We have solutions ready to roll:

3 policy proposals after we win: Unfu*k the world, Employ existing solutions, Explore breakthroughs

After we win: 3 education policy proposals: Truth/facts, Love/community, Lifelong virtue

**

Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site (and from other whistleblowers). Some links in current articles are therefore now blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. I’ll update as “hobby time” allows; including updating my earliest work from 2009 to 2011 (my blocked author pages: here, here).

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Dee

    Carl.. I have posted this before, but maybe you didn’t see it. You keep stressing that we were attacked by non state actors, so we can’t attack a state, and that is simply not true.

    http://www.law.emory.edu/fileadmin/journals/eilr/24/24.2/Wallach.pdf
    http://yalejournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/116118beehner.pdf
    Here are two law school studies/ position papers/ legal analysis on The International Laws of War and non state actors. A lot of it starts back with Pirates ( non state) and Privateers ( State Actors or under the control of a recognized authority , King , Potentate, President) Pirates having no protections and any who harbor them, Privateers operating in self defense and observing the Laws of War Usually get treated as actual military as to not having a trial and detained as POW . Actual Navy ship/ force in uniform full courtesy under the Laws of War. Then they added aircraft hijacking and the like. Land forces the object of the rules is to protect the civilians by clearly identifying the Military .. Operating behind enemy lines dress as a civilian or in the enemies uniform is spying, you have no protection under the Law of War. If you are committing war crimes behind enemy lines, and not in your proper uniform you are fair game and so is anybody that aids or shelters you. Remember Dr. Mudd who gave first aid to John Wiles Booth after Booth assassinated Lincoln, That where the expression ” Your name is Mud” came from and it pretty much sums up your status under the International Laws of War. You are legally consider a Threat to Humanity under International Law and the UN Charter and several dozen UNSCR on Terrorism .. Just as it is the duty of every member nation of the UN to arrest and try or extradite any terrorist, and if you don’t other nations can come in you country to get the terrorist themselves. Read the two papers .. all the UNSCR’s and precedents in international law and the law of war are in there, heavily footnote and lots of court cites.
    The Law is still evolving, because non state actors are still evolving.. do some folks , even legal folks thing we or the world should have a kinder gentler policy towards Terrorist , if fact what actually is terrorism hasn’t been totally pinned down yet, there is no actual UN or International Law definition , but not for trying.. UN meets regularly to work on this and other aspects of terrorism and right now the hand up is some nations do not want violence inspired by God by non state actors considered terrorism , and they have a pretty good Legal argument, States don’t have the power or authority to control or command God, so they can’t be held responsible. If it is Political it is Terrorism , If it is religious , it is devotion and faith. That is the current hang up to getting firm definitions ,, but in the mean time you have Proportionality .. that too has not been defined perfectly or to everybody’s satisfaction. In Civil Court you can recover damages and also compensatory damages if you were more than merely negligent .. and those vary wildly, 175 member nations , all with different civil codes.. they all agree on the basic concepts, but a lot of local variation on the details .. UN is meeting on that as well
    However in the meantime, those two papers have all the detail of how it is legal to pursue and kill or capture, just as in civil law you have different protocols for apprehension of non violent offenders and those declared violent predicate felons, armed and dangerous, or forcible felon, or spys under international law. And if the country they are sheltering in fails to meet it’s obligations under the UN Charter to arrest them and try or turn them over, or can’t, then any other member nation can. That is why there is a separate UNSCR and force in Afghanistan to train their Military so they can fulfill their obligation to the UN and the other nations of the world to suppress and eradicate Terrorism inside their borders.
    We were attacked by non-state actors on 9/11 what follows is legal self defense and collective self defense by anybody anywhere attacked by any terrorist. And anybody can go after them anywhere, with or without local permission, however if the nation is a signatory of the UN they should be doing the getting for the attacked nation. ,and by not going after them for whatever reason basically grant other nation permission by the UN Charter and a whole bunch of UNSCR’s.
    You keep making it sound like you think , because they are not a state , we have no recourse to justice or enforcement of our sovereignty, and that simply isn’t true, Quite the opposite, non state terrorist have absolutely no right anywhere in this planet to safe haven , by the UN Charter, UN Resolutions, and all the International Laws of War.

    • Carl_Herman

      Dee: I conclude that you are a propagandist/apologist for these unlawful wars. I will simply point to my documentation and invite interested reader to compare to yours, and come to their own conclusions.

      What you will never do, Dee, and what your papers will never do, and have so far not done, is to discuss the meaning and letter of war law to justify the position of using armed attack against another nation when that nation’s government has not attacked us. You/they can’t because the term, “self-defense” has a clear meaning.

      You first tried to present JAG’s military handbook as legal “cover” for US wars. Anyone can look to see it fails to even attempt to explain how US armed attacks meet the meaning of “self-defense”: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/us-military-legal-argument-current-wars-self-defense-whatever-say.html

      You then pointed to a UN Security Council Resolution that encouraged nations to “combat terrorism” as a legal authorization of nations to use armed attacks!

      We all know about the Bush lawyers attempting to justify torture, NDAA, drone assassinations of Americans, so if you want to stand with such “law” papers and bullshit, we certainly respect your freedom to do so.

      I’ve challenged you to debate me, and I’ll do it again, Dee: if you’re serious about your argument, write your best paper for publication, come up with your questions on my position, and we’ll create a few articles.

      Otherwise, again, this is all the time I’ll invest responding to readers curious about your comment, and you.

      • Dee

        I have looked at your documentation.. and none of it is about how Laws and Treaties apply.. you only have the general statements of the UN Charter and ask people to decide for themselves what they mean.. and that is fine, But it doesn’t discuss how they have been applied in the past , doesn’t address case law or precedent which is what develops the actual meaning and application of a law or treaty. And thus how they are applied to day.

        For legal or illegal to have any meaning, you need a court to back your interpretation one way or the other.

        There are no actual courts of jurisdiction that agree with you. I am not posting what I think it means, or what I wish it might mean, I am posting what the courts of jurisdiction say it means.. that is the operant reality in the world today.

        And there is a big difference between you personally not liking how the Jag handbook comes to the conclusion that the current wars are legal, or the JAG handbooks conclusion not satisfying you and it not being an explanation of the legality of the current wars. They didn’t write it to satisfy you, They wrote it to satisfy The International Courts and the UN, which it apparently does. Since no court has ruled otherwise and no condemnation from the UNSC is forthcoming or extant.

        You need to worry a little less about my motivation and a little more about the legal facts as seen by the various bodies of international law. But then you have no court rulings on your side.. so disparaging me is all you have.

        If you are going to cite the UN Charter then you sort of have to accept the UN Process and the UN rulings , the UNSC rulings on these things.. Same way with the International Laws of War and International Laws in general .. The have a couple courts depending on which treaty or convention you are citing.. and those courts have made rulings that are binding under the Treaties you cite, and nations act on them .. as required by the Treaties and Conventions that they signed. You think the courts ruled the wrong way or misinterpreted their own documents.. okay, your are entitled to your opinion.. but the nations are obligated to follow the applicable court rulings or UNSCR’s your personal opinion not withstanding .. no, really, literally, “Not” “With” “Standing” .. which actually means the courts do not even have to acknowledge that you have an opinion.

        Here is yet another analysis of The UN , The UNSC, and the use of force

        and specifically about the Iraq War no less .. it is a long paper, with many examples and analysis and UNSCR’s and political considerations and mistakes made.

        http://www.nids.go.jp/english/publication/kiyo/pdf/bulletin_e2005_2.pdf

        You really need to read it.

        • Dee is a terrorist.

          Dee, you obviously cant understand. HE STATED IT IS FOR THE PUBLIC TO CONCLUDE, AND HE IS 100% CORRECT. NO NATION HAS THE RIGHT TO armed attack against another nation when that nation’s government has not attacked us. You/they can’t because the term, “self-defense” has a clear meaning

          Dee, its almost as if, you are retarded.

          you clearly cant understand… what is wrong with you? because you cant listen, i wont even bother looking at your argument, just because you are such a moron… who CANT listen… ill do the same.

          • BO_stinks

            you’re an obama-hole for calling her a terrorist and your kind will never be elected into office as president, the people of America aren’t that stupid.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Dee is making clear concise arguments with documented examples of legal processes while your original article itself let alone your rebutals are barely intelligible rants of a far left sycophant, who calls anyone who dares to make sense a retarded moron, who’s comments they refuse to read.

          • Carl_Herman

            Go ahead, PSYCHOBAMA, ignore what “self-defense” means to justify your insults and calls for war. Go ahead and name-call rather than discuss the fact of what is and is not lawful war.

            Thank you for providing such a clear choice between just law that prevents Wars of Aggression, and all that you say to allow dictatorial war (dictate = whatever is said whenever it’s said).

            Rant on, pal. I doubt I’ll have anything more to contribute other than appreciation to make choices clear between US limited government under our Constitution, and your view that self-defense means whatever is said by our “leaders” no matter what stinking laws exist.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            I made no Insults , I am not calling for war, and I was not calling you names. i said your “rebutals were barely intelligible rants of a leftist sycophant ” not that you were yourself a leftist sycophant, although , it is understandable that you could make that assumption. I was just trying to point out that You were calling Dee names (retarded moron I believe) and that Dee was in fact making a more clear and persuasive point and indeed , I think, winning the debate

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site dude

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site

      • PSYCHOBAMA

        Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site

  • garyamusic .

    This is how simple it is.

    The writers of the “playbooks” make
    rules (laws). It doesn’t make them right! The US is writing the
    playbook and therefor we kill and maim wherever our influence is
    “needed” to extend the agenda. The US agenda is that of the globalist
    bankers………………….and that agenda is to control it all.

    And it’s just that simple……………..

  • Notgruntled

    “Since WW2, Earth has had 248 armed conflicts. The US started 201 of them.”

    Got anything resembling a source for that claim?

    • Carl_Herman

      Sorry, the link was bad; it’s fixed now.

      • Notgruntled

        So you’re assuming that “overseas military operations” is synonymous with starting a war?

        • Carl_Herman

          These operations killed ~30 million people, ~90% of whom are civilians, as the next link documents after these 200+ US-began armed conflicts. Many of these are easily proved and massive War Crimes, such as the current US armed conflicts. I propose immediate arrests of US “leadership” for its current unlawful and lie-began armed attacks.

          What do you propose?

          • Notgruntled

            I propose accurate reporting. Waste of breath, I know.

          • Dee is a terrorist

            I can count 50, in the last 20 years. id say his information is accurate.

            The problem here, is that you are american. A very honorable and proud bunch,

            but that pride and honor has blinded you. you are sent in (a soldier) oversea, to rid Afghanistan of WMD. You find no trace of anything, oh yah thats cause america closed down the nuclear program in 1988 in afghanistan. Yet you stay for 10 years to slaughter and implement a “democracy”

            you guys invaded a country and killed millions, without right or meaning.

            Somehow you still stand by your country? you are the definition of a terrorist.

            if you support the american army, you are a terrorist. If you have anything to do with american government, you are A TERRORIST.

            If a war with america ever starts, count me in. im down to rid this world of terrorist.

          • Notgruntled

            “you are sent in (a soldier) oversea, to rid Afghanistan of WMD. You find no trace of anything, oh yah thats cause america closed down the nuclear program in 1988 in afghanistan.”

            And you’re vouching for someone else’s accuracy?

          • BO_stinks

            and you’ll get your @ss kicked so far as to make infinity a new illustration

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            You mean arrest Obama,Jarret, Johnson, Kerry, Hillary Clinton ,Biden, etc.? Sounds like a Great Idea !

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            I propose you move to Cuba where they openly embrace your ideals and you could live in the lavish lap of Communist utopia with comrades who would share in your utter bliss, and together, you could stand against, individuality,self-determination,private property, human rights, etc.,etc. , and place infinite power in the hands of a government apparatus (you know, those things you blame for illegal wars that all the heads of should be arrested) led by “somebody” named Chairman !

          • Carl_Herman

            You dishonor all American families who sacrificed through two world wars by saying law enforcement of our most important law, war law, is some kind of joke.

            Again, please promote what you see as best. If you really want lie-started Wars of Aggression forever, keep going.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Never said anything of the kind, and your rebutals have descended into gibberish !

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Have you heard ? Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Of the well over 100 MILLION Citizens Murdered Under Socialist/Communist Rule, 100 % WERE CIVILIANS , Murdered in their home Country BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site so there

      • PSYCHOBAMA

        Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site in case you were wondering

  • BO_stinks

    what moronic simplicity and woeful ignorance you propose

  • BO_stinks

    you will not break down these ‘armed conflicts’ and no other data is provided. I did find one link trying to justify the numbers, it included the defense of our embassy as an armed conflict, such credibility gives you none.

    • Carl_Herman

      Liar BO_stinks: the data is in the link:
      Since WW2, Earth has had 248 armed conflicts. The US started 201 of them.
      Better watch your thoughts, words, and actions, pal. You’ll have the future you work for. Hope you enjoy these wars from all perspectives because they’ll come back to you from all those angles if that’s what you care enough about to promote.

      Choose wisely.

      • PSYCHOBAMA

        Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site in case you were wondering

  • PSYCHOBAMA

    Communists and socialists have killed over 100 million OF THEIR OWN CITIZENS in the same time period. Virtually every conflict the US has been involved in for 100 years has been combating either some form of communism/socialism (even the Nazis, national socialist) or Islamo-Fascists .

    • Carl_Herman

      Nope, liar PSYCHOBAMA: the data is for US-started armed attacks since WW2. These are wars of choice, illegal, and started on lies.

      • PSYCHOBAMA

        Exactly which part of 100 million dead citizens under socialist/Communist rule is a lie ??
        I know , more of those pesty facts and recorded researchable numbers that leftists hate .

        • Carl_Herman

          Now you move to ad hominem, liar PSYCHOBAMA, to somehow infer a character trait of the messenger because you cannot stick to the data of the US slaughtering over 30 million people in unlawful wars since WW2.

          You then show all you have: it’s somehow ok for the US to lie, bomb, invade, and set-up puppet governments because other countries in history also did that.

          Good for you, although 95%+ of Americans would prefer justice under the law rather than your fear and war-mongering.

          Enjoy the world you’re creating for yourself. Justice prevails.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Who would you have abandoned for slaughter by the Communist machine ? Koreans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laosians, Cubans, Poles, Czechs, etc., ? There are millions of survivors of all those illegal wars, who now live in the U.S. and you can walk right up and ask them just how dead they would be without American intervention .

          • Carl_Herman

            Liar PSYCHOBAMA: thanks for continuing to ignore the documentation I provide that clearly explains that the history of US Wars of Aggression is so clear that it is not contested on the facts I provide: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/teaching-critical-thinking-high-school-students-us-government-researchpresentation-5-2-6.html

            All you will ever do is pretend that evidence doesn’t exist by ignoring it, denying it, and distracting that the “other” is evil, the same propaganda that is also historically non-contested as what all evil nations do.

            Good luck with your future by being a cheerleader for war, and a cheerleader to never ever ever ever consider the facts that are the center of the topic under discussion: exactly what this article has written.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            I have lived the last 50 years of history, your one little link to your own blog about your own article does not trump what myself and billions of others have witnessed with our own eyes and have been involved in in our own personal lives over the last 5 decades.

          • Carl_Herman

            Yeah, PSYCHOBAMA, all you have is your personal unsubstantiated claims and in total denial of what 50 years of professional historians document. But go ahead and lie in light of 30 million killed by US unlawful wars, pal. The karma will do you good.

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            And all you have again is one measly little article that you wrote that is mostly your opinion and flies in the face of the reality we have all seen and is well documented in LEGITIMATE history books, rather than ONE LEFTIST BLOG !

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Also you have not addressed one word Ive said about the over 100 MILLION Citizens under Socialist / Communist rule who have been MURDERED by their own politicians in power. The Gulags ? The Chinese Cultural Revolution ? The Cambodian Killing Fields ? You have never heard of any of this ?!?!?!?!

          • PSYCHOBAMA

            Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site because they suck !

      • PSYCHOBAMA

        Also, the illegal wars of choice you speak of were almost entirely defending people from the advance of Communist expansion.

        • Carl_Herman

          No, liar, PSYCHOBAMA: you ignore the evidence the article provides to explain, document, and prove what is now conservatively accepted history without disagreement of these US wars to support friendly dictators. The link is this one, along with the expert testimony of the US Marines’ most-decorated general:
          US wars and rhetoric for more wars continue a long history of lie-began US Wars of Aggression. The most decorated US Marine general in his day warned all Americans of this fact of lie-started wars for 1% plunder.
          Your argument is called “denial” when you fail to address the documentation this article is based upon. This is the first usual move for people without facts to support them.

  • ForrestalMN

    Enemies of the U.S. are many.

  • ForrestalMN

    The free world has many enemies. The U.S. will vanquish them without the help of many nations. No need to thank us, but second guessing our methods gets old.

  • Rowdy Yates

    Horrible writing style. Accusatory and nasty to the bone. Please! Present the facts without the style. When I’m in need of opinion, I’ll dial in Fox Newz.

    • Carl_Herman

      Horrible comment style. Chooses to accuse the messenger as so nasty to the bone. Please! Address the facts or dial in Fox Newz.