Resolved: On balance, the United States was justified in going to war with Iraq

I agree with my opponent . .. from here on in only mortality and legality shall be debated. ::Moral Very short and sweet argument. NAP (Non-aggression principal) is actually based off of concequentialism AND utilitarianism by philosophers such as: David Friedman, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich Hayek[1] . Also NAP believes in aggression for self defence and defence of others. [2] As I have shown and my opponent has acknowledged Saddam was a genocidal maniac, thus my opponent has not only dropped this point but actually AGREES with me. I therefore ask for a point, and maintain that morally the resolution is thus negated. Also my opponents point is flawed: as I have shown in previous arguments the Iraqi's have ::VOTED IN A MINORITY PRESIDENT WHO SUPPORTS KURDISH RIGHTS. Thus his maintaining that killing Kurds to maintain happiness for Iraqi's is absurd and a lie, not only that but that was for the happiness of the Saddam Regime; much fewer people in the government than that of civilians. So therefore, he not only agrees with me, but Utilitarianism still stands as well as legitimate in every way shape and form. :: Genocide In Saddam's Iraqi All bable and lies. First, from February 11-15 of 2002, Iraqi held a human rights expert. In his report he stated: "reported allegations of gross human rights abuses in Iraq, including summary executions; arbitrary arrest, systematic torture 'in its most cruel forms'; coercion by means of reprisals against a family members; and mass discrimination regarding access to food supplies and health care"[3] Thus, meaning conspiracy to commit genocide and thus leading me to my next point! Yes he was inclined to continue those acts of 'Arabization'. From 1991-1998 during the 1991 rebellion researcher Richard Garfield estimates total child deaths alone at 227,000 as a result of all causes including sanctions. [4] Furthermore, many estimate that Saddam has caused the deaths of over 800,000 people in his regime. [5] This is NOT including the use of rape as a political tool, Kurds not being able to have a job and living in barbed wire and unsanitary conditions, all other forms of torture, the insecurities of believing friends and family may potentially be Iraqi secret police, Iran-Iraq War, and the invasion of Kuwait. [6] Thus, I not only met but excelled my burden of proof, and the resolution is again negated. These taking place in the 90's. To recap: Genocides were committed in the 90's, thus my opponent actually lied to the audience! My opponent claims I must excel 650 thousand people (due to Iraq War) to meet BOP, I have done so as the Saddam Regime killed millions, never mind rape, torture, consistent degrading, and insecurities caused. NAP is utilitarian thus he agrees with me, and it is also accepted in defence of another. Again, agreed. Point please :) If the Iraqi's voted in a Kurdish minority for President they could not possibly have been happy to support such executions under the Saddam Regime, thus making it relevant. Gross misconduct of human rights even went into 2002. ::Legal rebuttal Again short and sweet. United Nations Resolution 260 (III) signed December 9th, 1948 Titled: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 1 clearly states "The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish" [7] As shown before, Saddam did commit a genocide even acknowledged by my opponent, and thus the legality is all within that article. Sanctions did not work, people were still being killed, and thus the US was legally obligated to intervene. Over 142 states have ratified it and thus was a just action to go into Iraq. Iraq signed in Jan 20, 1959 . .. showing they knew they were going to be criminally responsible and the US signed in Dec 11, 1948. [8] The resolution is defeated, the Iraq War was justified. Sources: [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] Ibid [3] . http://www.policyalmanac.org... [4] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [6] Ibid [7] . http://www.hrweb.org... [8] . http://en.wikipedia.org...