Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-08-2015, 12:20 PM
 
Location: USA
31,041 posts, read 22,077,427 times
Reputation: 19081

Advertisements

Was it Justified? Sure, "might makes right". Every country in the world has been invaded and conquered at one time or another, with almost no exception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-08-2015, 02:44 PM
 
7,578 posts, read 5,325,444 times
Reputation: 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
By what right does anyone seize absolute power and establish a personal Thugocracy? There was nothing legitimate about The Pineapple's rule, so removing him cannot be seen as an illegitimate action.
I fail to see the justification under international law... which is why folks like Putin get a kick out of U.S. and western European histrionics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2015, 04:36 PM
 
14,993 posts, read 23,892,069 times
Reputation: 26523
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
I fail to see the justification under international law... which is why folks like Putin get a kick out of U.S. and western European histrionics.
International law is mandated by UN - justification for war requires approval by the UN as one of it's clauses. Since the esteemed body of the UN cannot make a simple decision on where to park near the UN headquarters they don't do a very good job of determining justification for war under international law.

You really need to go beyond the jokers at UN and look at the traditional practice of casus beli. Simply enough - does the country make a good case for war to it's own people and to the international community? Screw UN mandate. Well, we had 35,000 American expats in Panama, some of which were being beat up by Pineapple-face's thugs, at least one was killed. And more importantly you had one of the most strategically important areas of the world, of critical importance to US trade, being run by the local drug cartel. Lastly, the dude publically stated that he considerd his country at war with the US. That's a pretty damn good case for war.

In this case, the dying Soviet Union, it's satelite states, and 3rd world countries condemed the invasion. No suprise. Most of the South American countries that condemed it in public were no doubt in support privately, wanting to see an open canal. Others were of the same bannana republic dictatorship mentality of Pinneaple and were worried about their own fiefdom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2015, 07:00 PM
 
7,578 posts, read 5,325,444 times
Reputation: 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
International law is mandated by UN - justification for war requires approval by the UN as one of it's clauses. Since the esteemed body of the UN cannot make a simple decision on where to park near the UN headquarters they don't do a very good job of determining justification for war under international law.
Article 51
"Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2015, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
1,235 posts, read 1,769,447 times
Reputation: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
That's covered in reason 4 of the OP's list as one of the official reasons, it's no secret that the stability of the Panama Canal was critical and of uptmost strategic importance.
I think No. 4 on the list is sufficient reason for the U.S. to have taken Noriega out. But I think it is the only REAL reason the U.S. acted, all the other officially given reasons were just public relations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
The fact that Pinneappleface was some sort of informant for the CIA in previous years I do not see as relevant at that point in time. He obviously was not during the time of the invasion, he had gone rogue years previously.
Yes, that is is true. And to be fair, Reagan did try to give Noriega a diplomatic way out in the year or two prior to the invasion. But Noriega was too dumb and stubborn to take it.

One thing about Noriega's connection to the CIA. The U.S. Government knew very well Noriega was involved in the drug trade years before (while on the CIA's payroll). So the idea the U.S. govt. wanted him taken out because he was into drug trafficking is just ludicrous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2015, 08:32 AM
 
14,993 posts, read 23,892,069 times
Reputation: 26523
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
Article 51
"Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security."
Which in simple language means "Go to war and then we the UN then will vote on it and tell you if your war was justified or not".

Of all the thousands or armed conflict since WW2, I think the only one approved by the Security Council was Korea in 1951, that's only because China and USSR made a huge blunder of walking out of the UN at the time in protest of the Korean discussions. Of the other numerous thousands of armed conflicts that have happened since, yeah, UN article 51 has helped alot...sure.

Last edited by Dd714; 06-09-2015 at 08:41 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2015, 07:59 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 1,923,976 times
Reputation: 4724
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
You forgot one important fact - Panama (i.e. Pinnappleface Noriega and his goons) declared war on the US. When these tin pot dictator's declare war on the US as a publicity stunt to get favor with it's citizens, yeah you better then be prepared for a US aircraft carrier fleet with 30,000 troops to land on your shores. Particularly when we have 25,000 US citizens living there.

Pinnapple-face, like Saddam, overplayed his hand.
using that logic
if an 8 year old little girl approaches a 250 lb professional heavy weight boxer and declares "prepare to fight", should the boxer punch her as hard as he can in the face??

Bush should have publicly laughed at pineappleface's declaration of war...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2015, 10:46 AM
 
14,993 posts, read 23,892,069 times
Reputation: 26523
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky2balive View Post
using that logic
if an 8 year old little girl approaches a 250 lb professional heavy weight boxer and declares "prepare to fight", should the boxer punch her as hard as he can in the face??

Bush should have publicly laughed at pineappleface's declaration of war...

Does the little girl shoot and kill US unarmed military personnel, beat the crap out of others, and rape there wives?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2015, 11:19 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 1,923,976 times
Reputation: 4724
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
Does the little girl shoot and kill US unarmed military personnel, beat the crap out of others, and rape there wives?
most likely no
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2015, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Maryland about 20 miles NW of DC
6,104 posts, read 5,990,747 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreetLegal View Post
The official reasons for "Operation Just Cause" according to the Bush administration at the time were:

1) Defending democracy and human rights;
2) Combatting drug trafficking;
3) Safeguarding the lives of U.S. citizens in Panama;
4) Protecting the integrity of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties which were aimed at giving control of the Panama Canal back to Panama with a guarantee of neutrality for the canal zone and future shipping/world commerce;

United States invasion of Panama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The OP missed reason number 5 which was the most important reason for George H. W. Bush. Gen. Manuel Noriega was used as a conduit for getting laundered drug money and weapons to the Nicaraguan Contras. Drug trafficking was used to raise money to support this little murderous group in Nicaragua during the 1980s after the Sandinistas had knocked out Tacho Somoza a right wing puppet of the USA in Nicaragua and had formed a left wing government in this country. This was a key part of an illegal war waged by the Reagan Administration and its National Security Council chaired by Vice President George H. W. Bush against Nicaragua that cost over 50,000 lives in that nation. It is obvious that George H. W. Bush know, and approved of such nefarious activities conducted by the NSC and hence the real purpose of Enduring Freedom which cost 6,000 Panamanians their lives was to bury this piece of history from ever seeing the light of day.

Most of the reasons given above eg 1,2 3 and 4 are all smoke screen. The Bush Administration never really gave a rats ass about any of them and especially being concerned about the legacy of the Torrijos-Carter Treaty is one of them. General Torrijos was killed in a mysterious aircraft accident which put Manuel Noriega a CIA asset and commander of the Panamanian army in power. Torrijos was getting too leftist for American tastes of the 1980s so his helicopter just blew up. Things like this just happen don't they?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:11 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top