From: "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor(a)abc.com> To: <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Iraq and chemical weapons Reply-To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org Ordinarily I would just bring this up on a talk page, but this issue cuts across several articles, and I might need a ruling from Jimbo. How do we discuss the issue of "whether or not Iraq has chemical weapons"? Officially, of course, they deny having any. And it's a crucial yes-no matter because their alleged possession is the chief rationale behind the US-led war in Iraq. If Iraq doesn't chemical weapons, it looks like the US military campaign is: * not morally justified * a violation of international law ...which may have ramifications about whether Iraq is bound to treat POWs according to the Geneva Convention or can "legally" torture, execute or rape them. If Iraq does have chemical weapons, the US campaign seems: * at least partially justified * probably NOT a violation of international law ...although the last 2 points are in themselves controversial. The question is, how do we handle this when writing articles about the war? Ed Poor -------- Hi Ed, I believe your questions are very important. But, allow me to react to one of your comment, that might bring some light to you about how to handle the articles. If Iraq does have chemical weapons, the US campaign seems: * at least partially justified * probably NOT a violation of international law ... You are right when you say these last 2 points are in themselves controversial. It seems to me that you say it could be considered a justification to war to find chemical weapons in Irak. Let me first report what many french people said today (just for information) : US soldiers finding chemical weapons is necessarily a joke, a forged "proof" to justify their invasion, just as american representative tried to forge "proofs" for the UN to make the war acceptable. It is very unlikely that US soldiers tumble on chemical weapons just as easily, when so many inspectors found nothing in months. Saddam will not use illegal weapons - even if he has some - for it would give some justifications to american people for the invasion. But american people will find any way, to justify the war, if they don't find the proofs, they will make them, or will accuse other nations to have given weapons to Irak. What most french people think is that giving proofs of Irak having illegal weapons - whether these proofs are believable or not - will not be a good justification. The general belief here is that this war is *illegal*, because it didnot have the UN aggreement, as it had for the Gulf War. Most consider international laws here should apply *above* national laws, hence the illegality. Finding proofs AFTER the invasion, will not succeed to transform an illegal war in a legal...for the illegality was about "beginning" the war with international agreement in the first place. Not about finding proofs AFTER. If american soldiers find chemical weapons, I think some people would consider fair to state "the US campaign was at least partially justified". Other will not find this a justification at all - in particular all those who believe the situation could have been handled another way. Stating "finding chemical weapons made the US campaign probably NOT a violation of international law", though this point is controversial to some" would not really be NPOV. That "probably" is misplaced. "Probably" is an oriented view point. It might give all view points, but it might not give a proper representation of worldwide views. It make appear the ones thinking it was not a violation are the majority, when those who think the opposite are the minority. And, this, I fear, is not necessarily true and fair. Many people will go on believing it was illegal, even if they end up believing it was "maybe the best choice". And please, do avoid making the assumption that this "probably" is justified by what you read in english on the internet. I don't think that what one can read on average in english on the internet is a full representation of worldwide opinions. We might be missing all reports in arabic. Unfortunately. Yours Athypique ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com