Consciousness of Guilt: Genocide in Iraq?意識的罪惡感：種族滅絕在伊拉克？
Counterpunch 反擊 | Despite the precipitous plunge in his popularity and growing criticism of his competency, character, and style, George W. Bush is not really that much different from other presidents with respect to his hegemonic ambitions or his proclivity to use force to achieve foreign policy objectives. |儘管倉促投身在他的民望和日益增長的批評，他的能力，品格和作風，布什是不是真的有很多不同於其他總統尊重他的霸權野心或其proclivity使用武力來實現外交政策目標。 Continuing historical patterns, President Bush and all presidents since World War II have committed horrendous crimes against humanity in order to protect and advance American interests under the guise of liberating people from under the jackboot of brutal dictators or communist subversives, bringing democracy to totalitarian states, improving the lives of those who are suffering and eradicating terrorism.持續的歷史模式，布什總統和所有總統自第二次世界大戰以來，已承諾可怕的危害人類罪，以保護和促進美國的利益的幌子下，解放人民，從下jackboot殘暴的獨裁者或共產黨顛覆，使民主的極權國家，的生活得到改善，這些是誰的痛苦和剷除恐怖主義。
These are laudable goals reflecting prevailing shibboleths domestically.這些都是值得稱道的目標，反映了當時的shibboleths國內。 These goals are an alluring mantle for the real paradigm governing foreign policy which is the pursuit of American interests with total indifference to the consequences to people victimized by American “ideals”.這些目標是一個誘人的衣缽，為真正的範式執政外交政策，這是追求美國的利益與總的冷漠後果的受害國人民，由美國的“理想” 。
The gaping discrepancy between the stated goals of American foreign policy and its praxis is best exemplified by the apogee of war crimes: genocide.這個巨大的差距，說明目標的美國外交政策及其實踐是最好的例證遠地點的戰爭罪行：種族滅絕罪。 In its pursuit of these lofty goals, the United States has committed genocide in Iraq.在其追求這些崇高的目標，美國已犯下種族滅絕罪在伊拉克。 Intervention resulting in genocide at the very minimum proves that American government’s professed motives for foreign policy decisions are altogether specious.干預，導致種族滅絕在非常的最低證明，美國政府的professed動機外交政策的決定是完全似是而非。
Rationalizations for the application of military force have been based on euphemistic doctrines which have no basis in American or international law.合理化應用的軍事力量已委婉的基礎上的理論是沒有根據在美國的國內法或國際法。 George W. Bush’s doctrine of preemptive war was not new to foreign and defence policy strategists but can be traced back to Dean Acheson’s doctrine dismissing the applicability of international law to the United States as outlined in a speech to the American Society of International Law in 1963 in which he argued that:喬治W布什奇摩學說先發製人的戰爭不是新的外交和國防政策的戰略家，但可以追溯到迪安艾奇遜的教義，開除的適用性的國際法律向美國概述在一次講話中向美國社會國際法律於1963年，其中他認為：
The power, position and prestige of the US had been challenged [Cuban Missile Crisis] by another state and the law does not deal with such questions of ultimate power – power that comes close to the source of sovereignty.該權力觀，地位和威望，美國已提出質疑[古巴導彈危機]由另一個國家和法律不處理這些問題的最終權力-權力接近的來源主權。 [1] [ 1 ]
In other words, national interests including meretricious threats to the sovereignty of the American State supersede international law despite the fact the United Nations Charter makes provisions for these exigencies.在其他換言之，國家利益包括meretricious威脅的主權，美國國家取代國際法的，儘管事實上聯合國憲章作出了規定，這些緊急情況。
The growing appetite for the unilateral application of force resulted in the “humanitarian intervention” or “illegal but legitimate” doctrine during the Clinton and Bush presidencies.日益增長的胃口單方面的應用武力，導致在“人道主義干預”或“非法，但合法”的學說，在克林頓和布什總統。 This doctrine validated acts of preemption that justified the use of force whenever a threat was neither imminent nor substantial but necessary to defend the security interests of the United States against a perceived threat easily manufactured through the propaganda of fear.這一理論驗證的行為，認為合理的先發製人使用武力的威脅時，既不是迫在眉睫，也沒有實質性的，但要捍衛的安全利益，美國對一個知覺的威脅，很容易製造，通過宣傳的恐懼。
Invading and occupying Iraq under the pretext of a preemptive war, a country already decimated by Dessert Storm, sanctions and no-fly-zones, represents the quintessential tragedy and hypocrisy of American foreign policy.入侵和佔領伊拉克的藉口下，先發製人的戰爭，一個國家已經遭受沙漠風暴，制裁和不飛區，代表著精華的悲劇和虛偽的美國外交政策。 To verify that the American Government is guilty of genocide in Iraq, I will establish a set of criteria based on the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and apply them to Iraq.要驗證美國政府是犯有種族滅絕罪，在伊拉克，我會建立一套標準的基礎上的聯合國公約，為防止及懲治滅絕種族罪並將其應用到伊拉克。
The UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide sets out a number of criteria to evaluate whether or not a war crime attains the magnitude of genocide.聯合國公約關於防止及懲治滅絕種族罪列出了多項準則，以評估是否或不是一個戰爭罪達到規模的種族滅絕。 These criteria are not without controversy but by examining the scholarly literature on the subject and the judgments of the International Criminal Court, I have established conservative standards to assess whether or not the American Government is responsible for genocide in Iraq.這些標準是不無爭議，而是由研究學術文獻就此事和判決的國際刑事法院，我已成立保守的標準，以評估是否有或沒有美國政府是負責的種族滅絕在伊拉克。
According to the Convention:根據該公約：
Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, such as:滅絕種族罪是指有下列行為之一致力於意圖摧毀，全部或部分，某一民族，族裔，種族或宗教群體，如：
a) Killing members of the group; a ）殺害該團體的成員;
b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm;二）造成嚴重身體或精神傷害;
c) Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part; c ）故意造成的生活條件計算帶來毀滅其全部或部分;
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; d ）強制施行辦法，意圖防止該團體內的生育;
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. e ）強迫轉移該團體的兒童至另一團體。
Although the phrase “in whole or in part” sounds ambiguous, its ambit has been restricted by judgments of the International Criminal Court.雖然“全部或部分”聲音含糊不清，其範圍已受到限制的判決，國際刑事法院。 According to the Rapporteur for the Preparatory Commission of the International Criminal Court, “The accused aimed to destroy a large part of the group in a particular area.”根據該報告員為籌備委員會的國際刑事法庭， “被告的目的是摧毀一個大型的一部分，該集團在某一地區” 。
The International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia concluded that “The killing of all members of a group within a small geographical area” was tantamount to genocide.國際刑事法院為前南斯拉夫的結論是， “殺害所有成員的一組在一個小的地理區域”等同於種族屠殺。
Notwithstanding the imprecision of these definitions of “part”, the area in Bosnia referred to in the ruling sets a baseline for future cases.儘管不精確這些定義的“部分” ，該地區在波斯尼亞提到，在執政黨樹立了一個基線為今後的案件。 The architect of the Convention, Raphael Lemkin, intended to define “in part” as a level of destruction sufficiently substantial to imperil the existence of the group.建築師該公約，拉斐爾lemkin ，打算界定“部分”作為某種程度的破壞，足以大幅危害的存在，該集團。 Shedding even further light on this problem, the Convention itself considers attempted genocide to be punishable under the Convention implying that intent alone is sufficient to establish guilt.脫落，甚至進一步在這個問題上，公約本身認為種族滅絕企圖以受到懲罰，根據該公約暗示的意圖，單是足以確定有罪。
“Intent” is another term in need of clarification. “意圖”是另一項長遠的需要澄清的。 Apart from direct evidence through orders, statements, or coordinated acts, intention can be shown if “Acts of destruction that are not the specific goal but are predictable outcomes or by-products of a policy, which may have been avoided by a change in that policy.” [2]除了直接的證據，通過訂單，報表，或協調的行為，意圖可以證明，如果“破壞行為是沒有具體目標，但可預見的結果，或按產品的政策，這可能已經避免改變在這政策“ 。 [ 2 ]
The Genocide Convention defines two basic levels of guilt: the direct commission of genocide and complicity to commit genocide.及懲治滅絕種族罪公約的定義，兩個基本層次的內疚：直接委員會種族滅絕和共謀犯下種族滅絕罪。
Complicity in genocide must embody:在共謀種族滅絕必須體現：
Intentional participation;有意參與;
Knowledge of the genocidal intent of the perpetrators;知識的滅絕種族罪的犯罪意圖的行為人;
Organizing, planning, supplying arms, training intelligence, or direct military support.組織，策劃，提供武器，訓練，情報，或直接的軍事支持。
One example of direct American genocide, Iraq, has suffered massive destruction to its infrastructure, the economy and human life, particularly since the imposition of American sanctions in 1990 and the bombing in 1991.其中一個例子，美國的直接種族滅絕，伊拉克，遭受了大規模殺傷性其基礎設施，經濟和人類生活，特別是自實行制裁，美國在1990年和1991年的轟炸。 UN Resolution 661 mandated sanctions against Iraq originally to force Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait.聯合國661號決議授權對伊拉克的制裁，迫使原本伊拉克撤出科威特。 The resolution was worded in such a way as to grant the United States a veto over which products could be traded with Iraq.該決議的措辭以這樣一種方式給予美國否決哪些產品可以買賣與伊拉克。 The American government exploited that veto to severely punish the people of Iraq in the hope that they would overthrow Saddam Hussein themselves.美國政府認為，利用否決權嚴懲伊拉克人民的希望，他們將推翻薩達姆自己。
According to a 1993 UNICEF study, “What has become increasingly clear is that no significant movement toward food security can be achieved so long as the embargo remains in place.” [3]根據一項1993年兒童基金會的研究， “是什麼，已成為日益明顯的是，無顯著性運動對糧食安全才能實現，只要禁運仍然在的地方” [ 3 ]
Declassified documents divulge the fact that the Americans were aware of and responsible for a humanitarian crisis caused by the sanctions.解密文件透露的事實，即美國人都知道和負責人道主義危機所造成的制裁。 A Defense Intelligence Agency report on January 18, 1991 concludes that:一，國防情報局的報告對1991年1月18日得出結論認為：
Failing to secure supplies [for Iraq] will result in a shortage of pure drinking water for much of the population.沒有安全用品[伊拉克]將產生一種短缺的純飲用水的大部分人口。 This could lead to increased incidences; if not epidemics of disease…Current public health problems are attributable to the reduction of normal preventative medicine, waste disposal, water purification and distribution electricity, and the decreased ability to control disease outbreaks.[4]這可能導致增加的發病率;如果不是流行的疾病…目前的公共健康問題的原因是減少正常的預防醫學，廢物處理，水淨化和分配電力，和減少的能力，控制疾病暴發。 [ 4 ]
On January 15, 1991, B-52s were flying towards their targets in Iraq and cruise missiles were fired from ships in the Indian Ocean.對1991年1月15日的B - 52人，飛向他們的目標在伊拉克和巡航導彈發射了由船隻在印度洋。 Iraqi defences were incapable of offering any resistance.伊拉克部隊沒有能力提供任何抵抗。
Restricting the bombing to only military targets was not part of the US war plan whereas targets included hospitals, electric utilities, schools, factories, water treatment plants, irrigation systems, food storage facilities and community health centres.限制的轟炸，只有軍事目標並沒有參與美國的戰爭計劃，而目標包括醫院，電力，學校，工廠，水處理廠，灌溉系統，食物儲存設施和社區保健中心。 Over 200,000 people died, the majority of whom were civilians.超過二十萬人死亡，其中大部分是平民。
In 2003, George Bush Junior inflicted further atrocities on the devastated people of Iraq and on a country virtually bombed back into pre-industrial times by another so-called war.在2003年，小布什造成了進一步的暴行對受災的伊拉克人民和對一國的轟炸，幾乎回到前工業時代的另一位以所謂的戰爭。 As of today, Iraq has suffered a further one million casualties and four million refugees.截至今天為止，伊拉克遭受了進一步百萬的人員傷亡和400.0萬難民。
Whether or not the administrations of Bush Senior, Clinton, and Bush Junior intended to commit genocide in Iraq is irrelevant because the consequences of the bombings and sanctions could have been predicted by any reasonable person.是否或不是行政部門的老布什，克林頓和小布什打算滅絕種族在伊拉克無關，因為後果的轟炸和制裁可能已經預言，任何有理智的人。 The actions of these administrations clearly resulted in mass killing, serious bodily and mental harm, and the infliction of conditions calculated to bring about Iraq’s physical destruction in whole or in part.的行動，這些行政部門清楚，導致大規模殺傷性，嚴重的身體和精神傷害，以及造成的條件計算，使伊拉克的物理銷毀全部或部分。 Iraq is a clear-cut case of genocide.伊拉克是一個鮮明的案件種族滅絕。
The carnage resulting from this genocide clearly exposes the disparity between the professed principles of American foreign policy and its manifest practice.大屠殺所造成的種族滅絕，這清楚地暴露了差距professed的原則，美國外交政策及其實踐的體現。 This hypocrisy betrays the indifference of American leaders to basic democratic principles and to respect for both domestic and international law.這暴露了虛偽的冷漠態度，美國領導人的基本民主原則和尊重雙方的國內法和國際法。
David Model is a Professor of Political Science at Seneca College.朱模型是一個政治學教授塞尼卡學院。 He is the author of States of Darkness: US Complicity in Genocides Since 1945.他是作者的國家的黑暗：美國共謀在種族滅絕自1945年以來。 He can be reached at: david.model@senecac.on.ca他可以達成： david.model @ senecac.on.ca
Notes債券
[1] Acheson, D. (1968). [ 1 ]艾奇遜，四（ 1968年） 。 Dean Acheson’s remark is quoted in Louis Henkin: “How Nations Behave: Law and Foreign Policy.” Columbia University Press.迪安艾奇遜的話是引述在路易亨金： “如何聯合國的行為：法律和外交政策” 。哥倫比亞大學出版社。 P. 265-266.頁265-266 。
[2] Gellately, R., and Kiernan, B. (Eds.). [ 2 ] gellately ， r. ，科爾南，乙（合編） 。 (2003). （ 2003年） 。 The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective.幽靈種族滅絕：大屠殺在歷史的角度來看。 New York: Cambridge University Press.紐約：劍橋大學出版社。 P. 15.第15頁。
[3] UNICEF Report. [ 3 ]兒童基金會的報告。 (1993). （ 1993年） 。 Children, War, and Sanctions.兒童，戰爭與制裁。 Cited in Ullrich, G. (1998) “The effects of Sanctions on the Civilian Community of Iraq.”引用的烏爾里希瞪羚（ 1998 ） “的影響，制裁對平民社會的伊拉克” 。
[4] Defense Intelligence Agency. [ 4 ]美國國防情報局。 (1991, January 8). （ 1991年1月8日） 。 Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities.伊拉克水處理的脆弱性。
See More: 看到更多的： Iraq 伊拉克 World News 世界新聞Have Your Say: Consciousness of Guilt: Genocide in Iraq? 你說：意識的罪惡感：種族滅絕在伊拉克？
Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。
Or discuss this report in our our new forums 或討論這個報告在我們的我們的新論壇
One Response to “Consciousness of Guilt: Genocide in Iraq?” 1回應“意識，罪惡感：種族滅絕在伊拉克” ？
pingback: pingback ：
Posted: May 22nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm | 發布時間： 2008年5月22日在下午5時20分| Link to this 鏈接到本
Consciousness of Guilt: Genocide in Iraq?意識的罪惡感：種族滅絕在伊拉克？ « The Essence Of Hip Hop «的本質的hip hop
Free Newsletter 免費通訊 
Related News 相關新聞
- Announcement Of War Crimes Tribunal宣布戰爭罪行法庭
- Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007排名前25截尾的故事， 2007年
- Clinton urges Bush to boycott Beijing Olympics克林頓敦促布什抵制北京奧運
- Second UK general attacks US Iraq policy第二，英國的一般攻擊美國的伊拉克政策
- Robert Fisk: No wonder the bloggers are winning羅伯特菲斯克：怪不得博客正在取得勝利
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
- After Gitmo: The Government’s Responsibility後關塔那摩：政府的責任
- Iraqi TV station says US troops killed cameraman伊拉克電視台說，美軍打死的攝影師
- How the Government Is Passing Secret Laws政府如何通過法律的秘密
- Is Amsterdam turning into a prudish backwater?是阿姆斯特丹變成一個prudish回水？
- Here Come the Trials: A Military Commissions Cheat Sheet這裡來審判：一個軍事委員會小抄
- Criminal DNA left unchecked for 13 months罪犯DNA放任為13個月
- Olmert to US: Impose naval blockade on Iran奧爾默特美國：實行海上封鎖對伊朗
- DU Shells Used by US Worse Than Nuclear Weapons杜砲彈所使用的美國遜於核武器
- US Soldiers Did ‘Dirty Work’ for Chinese Interrogators美軍士兵沒有'骯髒的工作' ，為中國審問
- Heart experts warn Tasers deadly心臟專家警告泰瑟槍致命
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞
Archive 存檔
[…] source […] [ … … ]來源[ … … ]