text:
Opposition to the Iraq War

Opposition to the Iraq War significantly occurred worldwide, both before and during the initial 2003 invasion of Iraq by a United States–led coalition, and throughout the subsequent occupation. Individuals and groups opposing the war include the governments of many nations which did not take part in the invasion, including both its land neighbors Canada and Mexico, its NATO allies in Europe such as France and Germany, as well as China and Indonesia in Asia, and significant sections of the populace in those that took part in the invasion. Opposition to the war was also widespread domestically.

Rationales for opposition include the belief that the war is illegal according to the United Nations Charter, or would contribute to instability both within Iraq and the wider Middle East. Critics have also questioned the validity of the war's stated objectives, such as a supposed link between the country's Ba'athist government and the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, and its possession of weapons of mass destruction "certified" by the Niger uranium forgeries. The latter was claimed by the United States during the run-up to the war, but no such weapons were ever found.

Within the United States, popular opinion on the war has varied significantly with time. Although there was significant opposition to the idea in the months preceding the attack, polls taken during the invasion showed that a majority of US citizens supported their government's action. However, public opinion had shifted by 2004 to a majority believing that the invasion was a mistake, and has remained so since then. There has also been significant criticism of the war from US politicians such as Bernie Sanders, national security and military personnel, including generals such as Anthony Zinni and Paul Eaton who served in the war and have since spoken out against its handling, including calling for former Secretary of Defense's Donald Rumsfeld resignation. Lieutenant General Gregory S. Newbold, openly critical of Rumsfeld's plans for the invasion of Iraq, resigned in protest prior to the invasion.

Worldwide, the war and occupation have been officially condemned by 54 countries and the heads of many major religions. Popular anti-war feeling is strong in these and other countries, including the US' allies in the conflict, and many have experienced huge protests totalling millions of participants.

Early opposition
The opposition to the war manifested itself most visibly in a series of worldwide protests against the Iraq War during February 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq starting on March 20, 2003. Noam Chomsky said:

"Poll results available from Gallup International, as well as local sources for most of Europe, West and East, showed that support for a war carried out 'unilaterally by America and its allies' did not rise above 11 percent in any country. Support for a war if mandated by the UN ranged from 13 percent (Spain) to 51 percent (Netherlands)."

Reasons for opposition
Critics of the invasion claimed that it would lead collateral damage to deaths of thousands of Iraqi civilians and soldiers as well as Coalition soldiers, and that it would moreover damage peace and stability throughout the region and the world.

Another oft-stated reason for opposition is the Westphalian concept that foreign governments should never possess a right to intervene in another sovereign nation's internal affairs (including terrorism or any other non-international affair). Giorgio Agamben, the Italian philosopher, has also offered a critique of the logic of preemptive war.

Others did accept a limited right for military intervention in foreign countries, but nevertheless opposed the invasion on the basis that it was conducted without United Nations' approval and was hence a violation of international law. According to this position, adherence by the United States and the other great powers to the UN Charter and to other international treaties is a legal obligation; exercising military power in violation of the UN Charter undermines the rule of law and is illegal vigilantism on an international scale.

There was also skepticism of U.S. claims that Iraq's secular government had any links to Al-Qaeda, the Islamic fundamentalist terrorist group considered responsible for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Some expressed puzzlement that the United States would consider military action against Iraq and not against North Korea, which claimed it already had nuclear weapons and had announced that it was willing to contemplate war with the United States. This criticism intensified when North Korea reportedly conducted a nuclear weapons test on October 9, 2006.

There was also criticism of Coalition policy by those who did not believe that military actions would help to fight terror, with some believing that it would actually help Al-Qaeda's recruitment efforts; others believed that the war and immediate post-war period would lead to a greatly increased risk that weapons of mass destruction would fall into the wrong hands (including Al-Qaeda).

Both inside and outside of the U.S., some argued that the Bush Administration's rationale for war was to gain control over Iraqi natural resources (primarily petroleum). These critics felt that the war would not help to reduce the threat of WMD proliferation, and that the real reason for the war was to secure control over the Iraqi oil fields at a time when US links with Saudi Arabia were seen to be at risk. "No blood for oil" was a popular protest cry prior to the invasion in March 2003. Administration officials denied these charges, and scholar Jeff Colgan writes that "there is still no consensus on the degree to which oil played a role" in the Iraq War.

Some opponents of the war also believed that there would be no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and thus there was little reason for an invasion. Prominent among these was Scott Ritter, a former U.S. military intelligence officer and then a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq, and who in 1998 had been hawkish enough toward Iraq as to be admonished by U.S. Senator Joe Biden, "The decision of whether or not the country should go to war is slightly above your pay grade." Investigations after the invasion failed to produce evidence of WMDs in Iraq (apart from a very small number of degraded chemical weapons shells located after the Iran–Iraq War ended in 1988). Generally, however, very few opponents of the Iraq invasion publicly expressed doubt as to whether the Saddam Hussein regime possessed weapons of mass destruction.

During the occupation, some opponents accused President Bush of being indifferent to the suffering caused by the invasion. In 2006 for example he opined that when the history of Iraq is written the period would "look like just a comma", prompting criticism that he took the more than 2,700 US troop deaths lightly.

Popular opposition

The Iraq War was met with considerable popular opposition in the United States, beginning during the planning stages and continuing through the invasion subsequent occupation of Iraq. The months leading up to the war saw protests across the United States, the largest of which, held on February 15, 2003 involved about 300,000 to 400,000 protesters in New York City, with smaller numbers protesting in Seattle, San Francisco, Chicago, and other cities.

Consistent with the anti-war sentiment of the protests, in the months leading up to the Iraq War, American public opinion heavily favored a diplomatic solution over immediate military intervention. A January 2003 CBS News/New York Times poll found that 63% of Americans wanted President Bush to find a diplomatic solution to the Iraq situation, compared with 31% who favored immediate military intervention. That poll also found, however, that if diplomacy failed, support for military action to remove Saddam Hussein was above 60 percent.

Days before the March 20 invasion, a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll found support for the war was related to UN approval. Nearly six in 10 said they were ready for such an invasion "in the next week or two." But that support dropped off if the U.N. backing was not first obtained. If the U.N. Security Council were to reject a resolution paving the way for military action, only 54% of Americans favored a U.S. invasion. And if the Bush administration did not seek a final Security Council vote, support for a war dropped to 47%.

Immediately after the 2003 invasion most polls within the United States showed a substantial majority of Americans supporting war. In a March 2003 Gallup poll, the day after the invasion, 76% of Americans supported military action against Iraq, but that trend began to shift less than a year after the war began. Beginning in December 2004, polls have consistently shown that a majority thinks the invasion was a mistake. As of 2006, opinion on what the U.S. should do in Iraq is split, with a slight majority generally favoring setting a timetable for withdrawal, but against withdrawing immediately. However, in this area responses vary widely with the exact wording of the question.

After the invasion of Iraq, one of the most visible leaders of popular opposition in the U.S. was Cindy Sheehan, the mother of Casey Sheehan, a soldier killed in Iraq. Sheehan's role as an anti-war leader began with her camping out near President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, and continued with a nationwide tour and trips to Europe and South America.

Opposition from national security and military personnel

Several prominent members of the military and national security communities, particularly those who favor a more realist approach to international relations, have been critical of both the decision to invade Iraq and the prosecution of the War.

On July 28, 2002, less than eight months before the invasion of Iraq,The Washington Post reported that "many senior U.S. military officers" including members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff opposed an invasion on the grounds that the policy of containment was working.

A few days later, Gen. Joseph P. Hoar (Ret.) warned the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the invasion was risky and perhaps unnecessary.

Morton Halperin, a foreign policy expert with the Council on Foreign Relations and Center for American Progress warned that an invasion would increase the terrorist threat.

In a 2002 book, Scott Ritter, a Nuclear Weapons Inspector in Iraq from 1991–98, argued against an invasion and expressed doubts about the Bush Administration's claims that Saddam Hussein had a WMD capability. He later accused the Bush administration of deliberately misleading the public.

"I think [The Bush Administration] has stated that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, and that's as simple as they want to keep it. They don't want to get into the nitty-gritty things such as if you bury a Scud missile to hide it from detection, there is a little thing called corrosion. Where do you hide the fuel, how do you make this stuff up, how do you align it. Because when you disassemble it, there is a process called re-alignment. There is a factory involved in that. And then you have to test launch it to make sure that the alignment works, and that's detectable, and they haven't done that. There is a lot of common sense things that go into consideration of whether or not Iraq has an operational weapons of mass destruction capability."

Brent Scowcroft, who served as National Security Adviser to President George H. W. Bush was an early critic. He wrote an August 15, 2002 editorial in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Don't attack Saddam," arguing that the war would distract from the broader fight against terrorism and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which should be the U.S.'s highest priority in the Middle East. The next month, Gen. Hugh Shelton, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, agreed that war in Iraq would distract from the War on Terrorism.

Retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, former head of Central Command for U.S. forces in the Middle East and State Department's envoy to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, echoed many of Scowcroft's concerns in an October 2002 speech at the Middle East Institute. In a follow-up interview with Salon, Zinni said he was "not convinced we need to do this now," arguing that deposing Saddam Hussein was only the sixth or seventh top priority in the Middle East, behind the Middle East peace process, reforming Iran, our commitments in Afghanistan, and several others.

By January 19, 2003, Time magazine reported that "as many as 1 in 3 senior officers questions the wisdom of a preemptive war with Iraq."

On February 13, 2003 Ambassador Joseph Wilson, former chargé d'affaires in Baghdad, resigned from the Foreign Service and publicly questioned the need for another war in Iraq. After the War started, he wrote an editorial in The New York Times titled What I Didn't Find in Africa that claimed to discredit a Bush Administration claim that Iraq had attempted to procure uranium from Niger.

John Brady Kiesling, another career diplomat with similar reservations, resigned in a public letter in the New York Times on February 27. He was followed on March 10 by John H. Brown, a career diplomat with 22 years of service, and on March 19 by Mary Ann Wright, a diplomat with 15 years of service in the State Department following a military career of 29 years. The war started the next day.

Prominent diplomat George Kennan, who famously advocated the policy of containment of Soviet expansion during the Cold War warned of the unforeseen consequences of waging war against Iraq, a war that "bears no relation to the first war against terrorism" and declared efforts by the Bush administration to associate Al-Qaeda with Saddam Hussein "pathetically unsupportive and unreliable". Kennan stated:

"Anyone who has ever studied the history of American diplomacy, especially military diplomacy, knows that you might start in a war with certain things on your mind as a purpose of what you are doing, but in the end, you found yourself fighting for entirely different things that you had never thought of before ... In other words, war has a momentum of its own and it carries you away from all thoughtful intentions when you get into it. Today, if we went into Iraq, like the president would like us to do, you know where you begin. You never know where you are going to end."

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski (Ret.) was political/military desk officer at the Defense Department's office for Near East South Asia (NESA) in the months before the war. In December 2003 she began to write an anonymous column that described the disrupting influence of the Office of Special Plans on the analysis that led to the decision to go to war.

On June 16, 2004 twenty seven former senior U.S. diplomats and military commanders called Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change issued a statement against the war. The group included:
 * William J. Crowe, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President Ronald Reagan
 * Joseph Hoar, former Commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East
 * H. Allen Holmes, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations
 * Donald McHenry, former Ambassador to the United Nations
 * Merrill McPeak, former Air Force Chief of Staff
 * Jack F. Matlock Jr., a member of the National Security Council under Reagan and former Ambassador to the Soviet Union
 * John Reinhardt, former Director of the United States Information Agency
 * Ronald I. Spiers, Under Secretary General of the United Nations for Political Affairs and a former Ambassador
 * Stansfield Turner, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency

Richard Clarke, former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council for both the latter part of the Clinton Administration and early part of the George W. Bush Administration, criticized the Iraq War along similar lines in his 2004 book Against All Enemies and during his testimony before the 9/11 Commission. In addition to diverting funds from the fight against al-Qaeda, Clarke argued that the invasion of Iraq would actually bolster the efforts of Osama bin Laden and other Islamic radicals, who had long predicted that the U.S. planned to invade an oil-rich Middle Eastern country.

Similar arguments were made in a May 2004 interview and an August 2005 article by Lt. Gen. William Odom, former Director of the National Security Agency.

In April 2006, six prominent retired generals publicly criticized Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's handling of the war, and called for his resignation. The group included two generals who commanded troops in Iraq: Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr. (Ret.) and Maj. Gen. John Batiste (Ret.). One of the generals, Lieut. Gen. Greg Newbold (Ret.), who served as the Pentagon's top operations officer during the months leading up to the invasion, also published an article that month in Time Magazine entitled "Why Iraq Was a Mistake."

On September 12, 2007, two retired U.S. Army generals, Lt. Gen. Robert Gard and Brig. Gen. John Johns, joined former Sen. Gary Hart in publishing a statement calling for withdrawal from Iraq. Robert Gard is the Senior Military Fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, John Johns is on the board of directors for the Council for a Livable World, and Gary Hart is the Council's chairman.

In October 2007, Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, former commander of coalition forces in Iraq, called the 2007 "surge" a "flawed strategy", and suggested that the political leadership in the US would have been court martialed for their actions, had they been military personnel.

Opposition from soldiers
There have been several individual refusals to ship (e.g., Pablo Paredes, and 1st Lt. Ehren Watada) or to carry out missions (e.g. 343rd Quartermasters). Soon after the war began, 67% of surveyed US soldiers in Iraq told Stars and Stripes that the invasion was worthwhile, though half described their units' morale as "low." A Zogby poll in March 2006 found that 72% of US soldiers in Iraq said the war should be ended within a year, and a quarter said that all troops should be withdrawn immediately.

Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) was formed in 2004 to help antiwar soldiers network and seek solidarity from one another. IVAW held a Winter Soldier event, from March 13 through March 16, 2008, in which U.S. veterans spoke of their experiences during the Iraq War. The Pacifica Radio network broadcast the proceedings live, and streaming audio and video of the event is also available. John Bonifaz filed a suit on behalf of 12 Congress members and various military families to try to stop the Iraq War.

Using the example of GI resistance coffee housed during the Vietnam War some Iraq War veterans have founded anti-war coffeehouses near military bases to act as resources for soldiers opposed to the Iraq War. Two examples are Under the Hood Café near Fort Hood and Coffee Strong near Joint Base Lewis–McChord.

Congressional opposition

Opinion in the U.S. Congress leading up to the Iraq War generally favored a diplomatic solution, while supporting military intervention should diplomacy fail. The October 11, 2002 resolution that authorized President Bush to use force in Iraq passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23, and the House by 296 to 133. Leading opponents of the resolution included Senators Russ Feingold and Edward Kennedy.

As the war progressed and the insurgency began to develop into what many believe is a civil war in Iraq, Congressional support for the Iraq campaign began to wane. A flashpoint came on November 17, 2005, when Representative John Murtha, a Vietnam combat veteran who voted to authorize the war and is widely regarded as an ardent supporter of the military, introduced a resolution calling for U.S. forces in Iraq to be "redeployed at the earliest practicable date" to stand as a quick-reaction force in U.S. bases in neighboring countries such as Kuwait.

Since the introduction of the Murtha resolution, many members of Congress, particularly in the Democratic Party, have rallied around the strategy of a phased troop withdrawal. In the 2007 Congressional session, critics of the war have sought to tie additional war appropriations to a specific timetable for withdrawal. On March 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed an Iraq spending bill that requires that troops begin withdrawing in March 2008 and that most US forces be out of Iraq by August 31, 2008.

Congressional critics of the war have also opposed President Bush's plan to send an additional 20,000 U.S. soldiers to Iraq. On January 10, 2007, Senator Dick Durbin gave the Democratic response to this plan by saying: "We have given the Iraqis so much. ... Now, in the fourth year of this war, it is time for the Iraqis to stand and defend their own nation."

Opposition from presidential candidates
The Iraq War was the defining issue of the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign. All of the Republican candidates and most of the Democratic candidates supported the war, although most of the Democrats also criticized the war's prosecution.

John Kerry, the Democratic nominee for President in 2004, voted to authorize the invasion, and said during his campaign that he stood by his vote. He also argued during the campaign that "the way he (President Bush) went to war was a mistake."

In the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, candidates Representatives Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, Senators Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Mike Gravel were some of the most outspoken critics of the Iraq War. Ron Paul said that "The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. This war has cost more than 3,000 American lives, thousands of seriously wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars." Barack Obama (who went on to win the election) was not a senator at the time of the voting of the Iraq War Resolution, but had repeatedly voiced his disapproval of it both before and during his senatorship, saying at an anti war rally in Chicago on October 2, 2002: "I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars." He also spoke of the "undetermined length ... undetermined cost, [and] undetermined consequences" which even a successful war would bring. Dodd voted in favor of the Iraq War Resolution in 2002, but Dodd has since become an opponent of the war. Dodd has said the Iraq War has been waged "for all the wrong reasons" and that it is eroding both the nation's security and its moral leadership.

Opposition from lawyers specializing in international law
Investigator of Nazi war crimes Ben Ferencz has suggested in an interview given on August 25, 2006, that not only Saddam Hussein should be tried in the International Criminal Court, but also George W. Bush because the Iraq War had been begun by the U.S. without permission by the UN Security Council. Ben Ferencz wrote the foreword for political analyst Michael Haas's book, talking about possible indictment of Bush administration over war crime charges, titled George W. Bush, War Criminal?: The Bush Administration's Liability for 269 War Crimes.

Opposition in European countries

Around the 2003 Invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation of Iraq, polling data indicated that opposition to military action against Iraq was widespread in Europe. 'Anti-Bush' and anti-war sentiments were reflected in many western European countries, generally with the populace less sympathetic to the U.S. stance even when the government in a given country (e.g. the United Kingdom, or Italy) aligned themselves with the U.S. position. Opinion polls showed the population was against the war, with opposition as high as 90% in Spain and Italy, and also widespread in Eastern Europe. Some suggested that the reason for the EU's negative view of the war are Europe's economic interests in the region. However, the electorates of France and Germany were strongly opposed to the war and it would have been difficult for their governments to fail to reflect these views.

After the first UN resolution, the US and the UK pushed for a second resolution authorizing an invasion. The French and German governments, amongst others, took the position that the UN inspection process should be allowed to be completed. France's then-Foreign Minister, Dominique de Villepin received loud applause for his speech against the Iraq War at the United Nations on February 14, 2003. Neither of these countries have sent troops to Iraq. However, despite popular opinion in their countries, the governments of Italy and Spain supported the war politically and militarily, although Spain ceased to do so after the election of a Socialist government in 2004.

In the United Kingdom, both the governing Labour Party and the official opposition Conservative Party were in favour of the invasion. The Liberal Democrats insisted on a U.N. resolution; they opposed the war as a result. Outside parliament, anti-war sentiment was more widespread: the February 15, 2003 protest in London attracted between 750,000 and 2,000,000 supporters from various walks of life. Prominent politicians and other individuals expressing anti-war views included: Tory MP Ken Clarke, Charles Kennedy, Menzies Campbell, Tony Benn, George Galloway, future Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn, Chris Martin, Damon Albarn, Ms. Dynamite, and Bianca Jagger.

Two prominent Labour politicians resigned from their positions in opposition to the war. Leader of the House of Commons Robin Cook resigned from the Cabinet two days before the start of the invasion on 17 March. In a statement giving his reasons for resigning he said:

"Our interests are best protected not by unilateral action but by multilateral agreement and a world order governed by rules. Yet tonight the international partnerships most important to us are weakened: the European Union is divided; the Security Council is in stalemate. Those are heavy casualties of a war in which a shot has yet to be fired.' and 'The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the international bodies of which we are a leading partner—not NATO, not the European Union and, now, not the Security Council.'"

Secretary of State for International Development Clare Short supported the government's resolution in the House of Commons and remained in the Cabinet for two months but eventually resigned on 12 May.

Deputy FCO Legal Adviser Elizabeth Wilmshurst resigned on 20 March 2003, three days after Lord Goldsmith's final advice to the British government reversed her legal opinion (in Lord Goldsmith's first secret memo 10 days earlier ) that the invasion was illegal without a second United Nations Security Council Resolution to SCR 678.

Opposition throughout the world
Opinion polls showed that the population of nearly all countries opposed a war without UN mandate, and that the view of the United States as a danger to world peace had significantly increased. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described the war as illegal, saying in a September 2004 interview that it was "not in conformity with the Security Council."

Nelson Mandela, former President of South Africa, called the US's attitude five months before the invasion a "threat to world peace". He said they were sending a message that "if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries"; a message which "must be condemned in the strongest terms."

Religious opposition
On September 13, 2002, US Catholic bishops signed a letter to President Bush stating that any "preemptive, unilateral use of military force to overthrow the government of Iraq" could not be justified at the time. They came to this position by evaluating whether an attack against Iraq would satisfy the criteria for a just war as defined by Catholic theology.

US civil-rights leader the Reverend Jesse Jackson condemned the planned invasion, saying in February 2003 that it was not too late to stop the war and that people "must march until there is a declaration of peace and reconciliation."

The Vatican also spoke out against war in Iraq. Archbishop Renato Martino, a former U.N. envoy and current prefect of the Council for Justice and Peace, told reporters that war against Iraq was a preventive war and constituted a "war of aggression", and thus did not constitute a just war. The foreign minister, Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, expressed concerns that a war in Iraq would inflame anti-Christian feelings in the Islamic world. On February 8, 2003, Pope John Paul II said "we should never resign ourselves, almost as if war is inevitable." He spoke out again on March 22, 2003, shortly after the invasion began, saying that violence and arms "can never resolve the problems of man."

Both the outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, and his successor, Rowan Williams, spoke out against war with Iraq.

The executive committee of the World Council of Churches, an organization representing churches with a combined membership of between 350 million and 450 million Christians from over 100 countries, issued a statement in opposition to war with Iraq, stating that "War against Iraq would be immoral, unwise, and in breach of the principles of the United Nations Charter."

Jim Wallis of Sojourners Magazine has argued that, among both evangelical Christians and Catholics, "most major church bodies around the world" opposed the war. Raëlians also protested the war, organizing demonstrations in which they held signs saying "NO WAR ... ET wants Peace, too!"

Opposition by notable Non-Govermental Figures
In the lead-up to the invasion, a project by Talking Heads frontman David Byrne and comedian Russell Simmons was formed which was called "Musicians United to Win Without War." The artists who had their names involved in this are listed below:
 * Autechre
 * Eric Benet
 * T-Bone Burnett
 * Busta Rhymes
 * David Byrne
 * Capone-N-Noreaga
 * Rosanne Cash
 * George Clinton
 * Sheryl Crow
 * Ani DiFranco
 * Steve Earle
 * Missy Elliott
 * Brian Eno
 * Fat Joe
 * Fugazi
 * Emmylou Harris
 * Natalie Imbruglia
 * Jay-Z
 * Donnell Jones
 * K-Ci & JoJo
 * Angélique Kidjo
 * Kronos Quartet
 * Massive Attack
 * Dave Matthews
 * Natalie Merchant
 * Mobb Deep
 * Nas
 * Outkast
 * Pharoahe Monch
 * Lou Reed
 * R.E.M.
 * Raphael Saadiq
 * Ryuichi Sakamoto
 * Russell Simmons
 * Sonic Youth
 * David Sylvian
 * Tweet
 * Suzanne Vega
 * Caetano Veloso
 * Wilco
 * Lucinda Williams
 * Zap Mama

Protests against the Iraq War
Across the world popular opposition to the Iraq war has led to thousands of protests since 2002, against the invasion of Iraq. They were held in many cities worldwide, often co-ordinated to occur simultaneously worldwide. After the simultaneous demonstrations, on February 15, 2003, the largest in total turnout, New York Times writer Patrick Tyler claimed that they showed that there were two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion. As the war drew nearer, other groups held candlelight vigils and students walked out of school.

The February 15, 2003, worldwide protests drew millions of people across the world. It is generally estimated that over 3 million people marched in Rome, between one and two million in London, more than 600,000 in Madrid, 300,000 in Berlin, as well as in Damascus, Paris, New York, Oslo, Stockholm, Brussels, Johannesburg, Montreal—more than 600 cities in all, worldwide. This demonstration was listed in the 2004 Guinness World Records as the largest mass protest movement in history.

Support for Iraqi resistance and insurgency
There has been a debate among those opposed to the U.S. invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq in developed countries about how to relate to forces within Iraq. It is possible that Iraq paid the US in dinars for their efforts in the war.

Prior to the invasion, while it was common to accuse opponents of providing objective, if not intentional, support to Saddam, none of the major antiwar organizations declared any support for him, however limited. After the invasion and the toppling of Saddam's regime, some who had opposed it now supported continuing U.S. occupation, arguing that the U.S.'s intervention had given it an obligation to stabilize the country. However, those who remained opposed to the U.S. presence had to determine their approach to the developing armed insurgency and peaceful opposition to the occupation carried out by groups like the Worker-communist Party of Iraq (WCPI).

The most virulent divide has been about whether to support the insurgency. Of the major Western antiwar organizations, United for Peace and Justice has never supported the insurgency, but Act Now to Stop War and End Racism and the Stop the War Coalition have a more ambivalent stance on this subject. Of the smaller groups which participate in these coalitions, none support suicide bombings of Iraqi civilians, but some support violence against coalition soldiers.

At a 2004 conference in Japan, Eric Ruder, of the U.S.-based International Socialist Organization, presented a case for supporting the guerrillas. Citing the primarily decentralized and domestic nature of the insurgency, the fact that a clear majority of attacks are directed against U.S. and British forces, and he also claimed there was widespread Iraqi support for violent insurgency, Ruder argues that the insurgents' cause and methods are, on the whole, just and deserve support. He claims that the Iraqi right to self-determination precludes Western opponents of the occupation placing conditions on their support of the Iraqi resistance, and argues that "If the Iraqi resistance drives the U.S. out of Iraq, it would be a major setback for Bush's agenda and the agenda of the U.S. imperialism. This would be a tremendous victory for our side—making it much more difficult for the U.S. to choose a new target in the Middle East or elsewhere in trying to impose its will."

Sato Kazuyoshi, President of the Japanese Movement for Democratic Socialism, argues otherwise. Reporting on the discussion at the 2004 conference, he writes that, "We cannot support, nor extend our solidarity to, them on the grounds that their strategy excludes many Iraqi citizens—above all, women—and do great harm on the civilians, and will bring the Iraqi future society under an Islamic dictatorship." He cites in turn Mahmood Ketabchi of the WCPI, who criticizes Iraqi guerrilla groups for Baathist and Islamist connections, and attacks Ruder's view as a "Left Nationalism" which ignores divisions within Iraq. Countering the response that the best way to ensure that progressive forces, not reactionary ones, dominate post-occupation Iraq would be for progressives to take the lead in fighting the occupation, Ketabchi argues that this is not possible due to the present situation in Iraq. Nevertheless, he claims, "We do not have to choose between the US and Iraqi reactionary forces. Opposition to the US is not a progressive stand per se. What matters is the kind of future that this opposition represents and objectives it pursues." A third alternative is represented by what Kazuyoshi calls the "Civil Resistance."

Official condemnation
See also Governmental positions on the Iraq War prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq for pre-war positions.

The 55 following countries and unions have protested formally and officially the prosecution of this war. They oppose the Iraq War in principle, citing in some cases that they believe it is illegal, and in others that it required a United Nations mandate.

 * African Union
 * Arab League (except Kuwait)
 * 🇩🇿 Algeria
 * 🇧🇭 Bahrain
 * 🇰🇲 Comoros
 * 🇩🇯 Djibouti
 * 🇪🇬 Egypt
 * 🇮🇶 Iraq
 * 🇯🇴 Jordan
 * 🇱🇧 Lebanon
 * 🇱🇾 Libya
 * 🇲🇷 Mauritania
 * 🇲🇦 Morocco
 * 🇴🇲 Oman
 * Palestine
 * 🇶🇦 Qatar
 * 🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia
 * 🇸🇴 Somalia
 * 🇸🇩 Sudan
 * Syria
 * 🇹🇳 Tunisia
 * 🇦🇪 United Arab Emirates
 * 🇾🇪 Yemen
 * 🇪🇺 European Union
 * 🇦🇹 Austria
 * 🇧🇪 Belgium
 * 🇫🇷 France
 * 🇩🇪 Germany
 * 🇸🇮 Slovenia
 * 🇸🇪 Sweden
 * 🇦🇷 Argentina
 * 🇧🇩 Bangladesh
 * 🇧🇾 Belarus
 * 🇧🇷 Brazil
 * 🇨🇦 Canada
 * 🇨🇱 Chile
 * 🇨🇳 China
 * 🇭🇷 Croatia
 * 🇨🇺 Cuba
 * 🇩🇲 Dominica
 * 🇪🇨 Ecuador
 * 🇮🇳 India
 * 🇮🇷 Iran
 * 🇮🇩 Indonesia
 * 🇱🇮 Liechtenstein
 * 🇲🇾 Malaysia
 * 🇲🇽 Mexico
 * 🇳🇿 New Zealand
 * 🇰🇵 North Korea
 * 🇳🇴 Norway
 * 🇵🇰 Pakistan
 * 🇷🇺 Russia
 * 🇨🇭 Switzerland
 * 🇹🇷 Turkey
 * 🇻🇦 Vatican City
 * 🇻🇪 Venezuela
 * Vietnam

Quotations

 * "The option of war can appear initially to be the most rapid. But let us not forget that after winning the war, peace must be built." – Dominique de Villepin, French Foreign Minister, at the United Nations Security Council on February 14, 2003
 * "To a certain extent Saddam Hussein's departure was a positive thing. But it also provoked reactions, such as the mobilization in a number of countries, of men and women of Islam, which has made the world more dangerous." – French President Jacques Chirac, November 17, 2004
 * "Make no mistake about it, the ultimate aim that the Bush and Blair regimes have embarked upon is nothing less than 'universal or world domination.' Iraq is merely a stepping stone along the way."– David Comissiong (Barbadian Politician)
 * "Iraq was not involved in 9-11, Iraq was not a terrorist state. But now that we have decimated the country, the borders are open, freedom fighters from other countries are going in and they have created more terrorism by going to an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country." – Cindy Sheehan (American anti-war activist), Interview with CBS News' Mark Knoller, upon her arrival in Crawford, Texas on August 6, 2005

title: Opposition to the Iraq War


text:
Land Force Western Area

Land Force Western Area (LFWA) was a formation of the Canadian Army responsible for operations in the Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. LFWA was headquartered at CFB Edmonton. The command was formed in 1991. In 2013 it was announced that LFWA would be renamed 3rd Canadian Division. This change took place in the summer of 2014.

History
LFWA was created on 1 September 1991, taking command of what was previously Prairie Militia Area, Pacific Militia Area, and the Regular Force Army units and formations in western Canada from the northern lakehead region of Ontario to the Pacific Ocean. At that point in time, the Militia Areas ceased to exist, and the seven subordinate Militia Districts were reorganised into four: British Columbia District, Alberta District, Saskatchewan District, and Manitoba-Lakehead District.

Later that decade, the four reserve force districts were again reorganized into three Canadian Brigade Groups.

In 2014 LFWA was renamed 3rd Canadian Division. With this change of name, the formation was also granted the identifying patch and historical lineage to the division that fought in the two world wars.

Commanders

 * Major-General T.F. de Faye (1991–93)
 * Brigadier-General Beare, CD (2004–2005)
 * Brigadier-General Jorgensen, OMM, MSM, CD (2008 −2010)
 * Brigadier-General P.F. Wynnyk, OMM, CD (2010–2012)
 * Brigadier-General J.C.G. Juneau (2012–2014)

Units
Land Force Western Area had four brigade groups (one Regular Force and three Reserve Force), and an Area Support Group.

There were also five units are under direct command of LFWA that did not operate under the brigade or area support groups. They were:
 * Land Force Western Area Headquarters – (CFB Edmonton)
 * 6 Intelligence Company
 * 1 Area Construction Troop, 4 Engineer Support Regiment – (CFB Edmonton)
 * 4th Canadian Ranger Patrol Group – (Group HQ in Victoria, BC. Ranger Company HQs in Victoria, Edmonton and Winnipeg, plus Junior Canadian Ranger Company HQ also in Victoria. 42 Canadian Ranger Patrols (platoon size) across the four western provinces)
 * Land Force Western Area Training Centre – (CFB Wainwright)

The LFWA maintained an official military band until 1998.

1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group
1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group was a Regular Force brigade group based out of CFB Edmonton.

1 Area Support Group
1 Area Support Group was headquartered out of CFB Edmonton. The Support Group was responsible for providing service and support to the units of Land Force Western Area.

38 Canadian Brigade Group
38 Canadian Brigade Group (38 CBG) was a Reserve Force brigade group based out of Winnipeg, Manitoba. It's composed of units in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and eastwards into Ontario to Thunder Bay, Ontario.

39 Canadian Brigade Group
39 Canadian Brigade Group (39 CBG) was a Primary Reserve brigade group based out of Vancouver, British Columbia. All of the units of the brigade are from the province of British Columbia.

41 Canadian Brigade Group
41 Canadian Brigade Group (41 CBG) was a Reserve Force brigade group based out of Calgary, Alberta. The units forming the brigade group are from the province of Alberta, as well as a company based out of Yellowknife, Northwest Territories.

Acronyms

 * ASU: Area Support Unit
 * CFB: Canadian Forces Base
 * RCA: The Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery
 * RCAC: Royal Canadian Armoured Corps

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Land Force Western Area


text:
United Nations Security Council and the Iraq War

In March 2003 the United States government announced that "diplomacy has failed" and that it would proceed with a "coalition of the willing" to rid Iraq under Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction the US and UK claimed it possessed. The 2003 invasion of Iraq began a few days later. Prior to this decision, there had been much diplomacy and debate amongst the members of the United Nations Security Council over how to deal with the situation. This article examines the positions of these states as they changed during 2002–2003.

History
Prior to 2002, the Security Council had passed 16 resolutions on Iraq. In 2002, the Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441.

In 2003, the governments of the US, Britain, and Spain proposed another resolution on Iraq, which they called the "eighteenth resolution" and others called the "second resolution." This proposed resolution was subsequently withdrawn when it became clear that several permanent members of the council would cast 'no' votes on any new resolution, thereby vetoing it. Had that occurred, it would have become even more difficult for those wishing to invade Iraq to argue that the council had authorized the subsequent invasion. Regardless of the threatened or likely vetoes, it seems that the coalition at no time was assured any more than four affirmative votes in the Council—the US, Britain, Spain, and Bulgaria—well short of the requirement for nine affirmative votes.

On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal." This was challenged by several experts on international law.

Inspections
Following the passage of Resolution 1441, on 8 November 2002, weapons inspectors of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission returned to Iraq for the first time since being withdrawn by the United Nations. Whether Iraq actually had weapons of mass destruction or not was being investigated by Hans Blix, head of the commission, and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Inspectors remained in the country until they withdrew after being notified of the imminent invasion by the United States, Britain, and two other countries.

In early December 2002, Iraq filed a 12,000-page weapons declaration with the UN. After reviewing the document, UN weapons inspectors, the US, France, United Kingdom, and other countries thought that this declaration failed to account for all of Iraq's chemical and biological agents. Many of these countries had supplied the Iraqi government with the technology to make these weapons in the 1980s during the Iran–Iraq War. On December 19, United States Secretary of State Colin Powell stated that Iraq was in "material breach" of the Security Council resolution.

Blix has complained that, to this day, the United States and Britain have not presented him with the evidence that they claim to possess regarding Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.

Report of Hans Blix on February 14
UN Chief Inspector Hans Blix, on 14 February 2003, presented a report to the Security Council. Blix gave an update of the situation in Iraq, and he stated that the Iraqis were now more proactive in their cooperation. He also rebutted some of the arguments proposed by Powell. Blix questioned the interpretations of the satellite images put forward by Powell, and stated that alternate interpretations of the satellite images were credible. He also stated that the Iraqis have in fact never received early warning of the inspectors visiting any sites (an allegation made by Powell during his presentation). International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohammed ElBaradei also said that he did not believe the Iraqis have a nuclear weapons program, unlike what Powell had claimed.

This report of February 14 and the protests of February 16 appear to have created reluctance in some of the members of the Security Council over the proposed war on Iraq. A second resolution was being drafted with the intention that it would find Iraq in "material breach" and the "serious consequences" of Resolution 1441 should be implemented.

Report of Blix on March 7
On 7 March 2003, Blix made his twelfth quarterly report on the status of UNMOVIC's efforts to verify Iraq's disarmament. A transcript of his presentation is available at CNN.

Invasion
As George W. Bush gave Saddam Hussein an ultimatum to leave power, the UN pulled out all the inspectors from Iraq. Days later the invasion began.

Positions of Security Council members

 * 🇺🇸 United States - The US maintained that Iraq was not cooperating with UN inspectors and had not met its obligations to 17 UN resolutions. The US felt that Resolution 1441 called for the immediate, total unilateral disarmament of Iraq and continued to show frustration at the fact that months after the resolution was passed Iraq was still not, in its view, disarming. Language in Resolution 1441 recalled that the use of "all means necessary" was still authorized and in effect from Resolution 678, and therefore maintained that if Iraq failed to comply with the "one final chance to comply" provision of Resolution 1441, then military action would be the result.
 * 🇬🇧 United Kingdom - Within the Security Council, the UK was the primary supporter of the US plan to invade Iraq. Prime Minister Tony Blair publicly and vigorously supported US policy on Iraq, and portrayed himself as exerting a moderating influence on Bush. British public opinion polls in late January showed that the public support for the war was deteriorating. It had fallen from 50 percent to 30 percent by March.
 * 🇫🇷 France - On 20 January 2003, Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said, "We think that military intervention would be the worst possible solution," although France believed that Iraq may have had an ongoing chemical and nuclear weapons program. Villepin went on to say that he believed the presence of UN weapons inspectors had frozen Iraq's weapons programs. France also suggested that it would veto any resolution allowing military intervention offered by the US or Britain. The most important French speech during the crisis was made by de Villepin at the Security Council on the 14 February 2003, after Hans Blix presented his detailed report (see below). De Villepin detailed the three major risks of a "premature recourse to the military option", especially the "incalculable consequences for the stability of this scarred and fragile region". He said that "the option of war might seem a priori to be the swiftest, but let us not forget that having won the war, one has to build peace". He emphasized that "real progress is beginning to be apparent" through the inspections, and that, "given the present state of our research and intelligence, in liaison with our allies", the alleged links between al-Qaeda and the regime in Baghdad explained by Colin Powell were not established. He concluded by referring to the dramatic experience of "old Europe" during World War II. This "impassioned" speech "against war on Iraq, or immediate war on Iraq", won "an unprecedented applause", reported the BBC's Sir David Frost (BBC News). The complete text is available at the Embassy of France in the United States. Britain and the US sharply criticized France for this position in March 2003.
 * 🇷🇺 Russia - On the same day, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said that "Russia deems that there is no evidence that would justify a war in Iraq." On January 28, however, Russia's opinion had begun to shift following a report the previous day by UN inspectors which stated that Iraq had cooperated on a practical level with monitors, but had not demonstrated a "genuine acceptance" of the need to disarm. Russian President Vladimir Putin indicated that he would support a US-led war if things did not change and Iraq continued to show a reluctance to completely cooperate with inspection teams. However, Putin continued to stress that the US must not go alone in any such military endeavor, but instead must work through the UN Security Council. He also stressed the need for giving the UN inspectors more time. Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov also garnered unusual applause inside the chamber with his speech against the war.
 * 🇨🇳 China - On January 23, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said Beijing was "worried and uneasy about the large-scale military build-up" in the Gulf region and that China's position on potential war with Iraq was "extremely close" to France's. Chinese officials repeatedly spoke in support of a diplomatic solution, including continued weapons inspections.
 * 🇩🇪 Germany - On January 22, German chancellor Gerhard Schröder, at a meeting with French president Jacques Chirac, said that he and Chirac would do all they could to avert war. At the time, Germany was presiding over the Security Council.
 * 🇦🇴 Angola - Angola supported continued inspections, but had not taken a stand on disarmament by military action.
 * 🇧🇬 Bulgaria - Bulgaria suggested that it would support the use of military force to disarm Iraq, even without UN backing.
 * 🇨🇲 Cameroon - Cameroon encouraged the continued inspections, but had not taken a firm stand on whether the country would support a US led strike to invade Iraq.
 * 🇨🇱 Chile - Chile indicated that it would like inspections to continue, but had not taken a position on the use of military force to disarm Iraq.
 * 🇬🇳 Guinea - Guinea supported further inspections, but had not taken a position on the use of military force to disarm Iraq.
 * 🇲🇽 Mexico - Mexico supported further inspections, and hinted that it would support a US-led military campaign if it were backed by the UN. The country also hinted that it might consider supporting a military campaign without UN backing as well. President Vicente Fox heavily criticized the war when it started and Mexican diplomats described their conversations with US officials as hostile in tone and that Washington was demonstrating little concern for the constitutional constraints of the Mexican government to counduct foreign policy according to the principles of non intervention and proscription of the use of force among nations, as well as the overwhelming opposition to the war in Mexico. (USA Today)
 * 🇵🇰 Pakistan - Pakistan supported continued inspections.
 * Syria - Syria felt that Iraq was cooperating and meeting its obligations under UN resolutions. Syria would have liked to see the crippling UN sanctions on Iraq lifted.
 * 🇪🇸 Spain - Spain supported the US's position on Iraq and supported the use of force to disarm Iraq, even without UN approval.

Analysis
According to Britain, a majority of the UN Security Council members supported its proposed 18th resolution which gave Iraq a deadline to comply with previous resolutions, until France announced that they would veto any new resolution that gave Iraq a deadline. However, for a resolution to pass, a supermajority of 9 out of 15 votes are needed. Only four countries announced they would support a resolution backing the war.

In the mid-1990s, France, Russia and other members of the UN Security Council asked for sanctions on Iraq to be lifted. The sanctions were criticized for making ordinary people suffer and being the cause of a humanitarian catastrophe leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths.

The Institute for Policy Studies published a report analyzing what it called the "arm-twisting offensive" by the United States government to get nations to support it. Although President Bush described nations supporting him as the "coalition of the willing", the report concluded that it was more accurately described as a "coalition of the coerced." According to the report, most nations supporting Bush "were recruited through coercion, bullying, and bribery." The techniques used to pressure nations to support the United States included a variety of incentives including:
 * Promises of aid and loan guarantees to nations who supported the US
 * Promises of military assistance to nations who supported the US
 * Threats to veto NATO membership applications for countries who don't do what the US asked
 * Leveraging the size of the US export market and US influence over financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
 * Deciding which countries receive trade benefits under such laws as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and the Free Trade Agreement (FTA), which, as one of its conditions for eligibility for such benefits, requires that a country does "not engage in activities that undermine United States national security interests".
 * Deciding what countries it should buy petroleum from in stocking its strategic reserves. The US has exerted such pressure on several oil-exporting nations, such as Mexico.

In addition to the above tactics, the British newspaper The Observer published an investigative report revealing that the National Security Agency of the United States was conducting a secret surveillance operation directed at intercepting the telephone and email communications of several Security Council diplomats, both in their offices and in their homes. This campaign, the result of a directive by National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, was aimed primarily at the delegations from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Guinea and Pakistan. The investigative report cited an NSA memo which advised senior agency officials that it was "'mounting a surge' aimed at gleaning information not only on how delegations on the Security Council will vote on any second resolution on Iraq, but also 'policies', 'negotiating positions', 'alliances' and 'dependencies' - the 'whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to US goals or to head off surprises'."

The story was carried by the European and Australian press, and served as a further embarrassment to the Bush administration's efforts to rally support for an invasion of Iraq. A member or Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), Katharine Gun was charged under the Official Secrets Act 1989 in connection with the leaking of the memo. She stated her intention to plead not guilty on the grounds that her actions were justified to prevent an illegal war. The case against her was dropped after the prosecution declined to present any evidence at her trial.

Clare Short, a British cabinet minister who resigned in May 2003 over the war, stated in media interviews that British intelligence regularly spied on UN officials. She stated that she had read transcripts of Kofi Annan's conversations.

Powell retraction
In 2004 and 2005 Colin Powell acknowledged that much of his 2003 UN presentation was inaccurate: "I looked at the four [sources] that [the CIA] gave me for [the mobile bio-labs], and they stood behind them, ... Now it appears not to be the case that it was that solid. At the time I was preparing the presentation, it was presented to me as being solid. April 3, 2004"

"I feel terrible ... [giving the speech] ... It's a blot. I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and [it] will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now. Sep 8, 2005"


text:
Canadian special forces

Canadian special forces can refer to:

 * Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM)
 * The current Canadian military special forces, established 2006

 * Special Operations Group (Canada) (SOG)
 * established 2005

 * 1st Special Service Force, The Devil's Brigade
 * A joint Canada-USA special forces unit of WWII, Canada's first special forces, established 1942 and disbanded 1944

 * Special Emergency Response Team (SERT)
 * The RCMP's former special forces team, disbanded 1993

 * Joint Task Force 2 (JTF2)
 * A component of CANSOFCOM, and successor to SERT, established 1993

 * Canadian Special Operations Regiment (CSOR)
 * provides the CF with a multi dimensional SOF unit that can be deployed anywhere in Canada or internationally. Focussed primarily on special reconnaissance, direct action, and special warfare.

 * The Canadian Airborne Regiment
 * Sometimes called Canadian special forces, established in 1968 and disbanded 1995

title: Canadian special forces


text:
Lothair II

Lothair II (835 – 8 August 869) was the king of Lotharingia from 855 until his death in 869. He was the second son of Emperor Lothair I and Ermengarde of Tours. He was married to Teutberga (died 875), daughter of Boso the Elder.

Reign
For political reasons, his father made him marry Teutberga in 855. Just a few days before his death in late autumn of 855, Emperor Lothair I divided his realm of Middle Francia among his three sons, a partition known as Treaty of Prüm. Lothair II received the Middle Francia territory west of the Rhine stretching from the North Sea to the Jura Mountains. It became known as Regnum Lotharii and early in the 10th century as Lotharingia or Lorraine (a designation subsequently applied only to the Duchy of Lorraine). His elder brother Louis II received northern Italy and the title of Emperor, and his younger brother Charles received the western parts of his father's domains, Burgundy and the Provence.

On the death of his brother Charles in 863, Lothair added some lands south of the Jura to this realm, but except for a few feeble expeditions against the Norman pirates he seems to have done little for its government or its defense. Thirty-six of Lothair II's royal charters survive.

Teutberga was not capable of bearing children and Lothair's reign was chiefly occupied by his efforts to obtain an annulment of their marriage, and his relations with his uncles Charles the Bald and Louis the German were influenced by his desire to obtain their support for this endeavour. Although quarrels and reconciliations between the three kings followed each other in quick succession, in general it may be said that Louis favoured annulment, and Charles opposed it, while neither lost sight of the fact that Lothair had no sons to inherit his lands. Lothair, whose desire for annulment was prompted by his affection for his mistress, Waldrada, put away Teutberga, but Hucbert took up arms on her behalf, and after she had submitted successfully to the ordeal of water, Lothair was compelled to restore her in 858. Still pursuing his purpose, he won the support of his brother, Emperor Louis II, by a cession of lands and obtained the consent of the local clergy, such as Adventius of Metz, to the annulment and to his marriage with Waldrada, which took place in 862.

A synod of Frankish bishops met at Metz in 863 and confirmed this decision, but Teutberga fled to the court of Charles the Bald, and Pope Nicholas I voided the decision of the synod. An attack on Rome by the emperor was without result, and in 865 Lothair, threatened with excommunication and convinced that Louis and Charles at their recent meeting had discussed the partition of his kingdom, again took back his wife. Teutberga, however, either from inclination or compulsion, now expressed her desire for an annulment, and Lothair went to Italy to obtain the assent of the new pope, Adrian II. Placing a favourable interpretation upon the words of the pope, he had set out on the return journey, when he was seized with fever and died at Piacenza on August 8, 869.

Succession
His son, Hugh, by Waldrada, was declared illegitimate, so his heir was his brother, Louis II of Italy. As Louis was at that time campaigning against the Emirate of Bari, his kingdom was divided by and between his uncles Charles the Bald and Louis the German by the Treaty of Meerssen.

Descendants
Lothair II had some sons and probably three daughters, all by Waldrada, and all of whom were declared illegitimate:

 * Hugh (c. 855 – 895), Duke of Alsace (867–885)
 * Gisela (c. 865 – 908), who in 883 married Godfrey, the Viking leader ruling in Frisia, who was murdered in 885
 * Bertha (c. 863 – 925), who married Count Theobald of Arles (c. 854 – 895), nephew of Teutberga. They had two sons Hugh of Italy and Boso of Tuscany. After Theobald's death, between 895 and 898 she married Adalbert II of Tuscany (c. 875 – 915). They had at least three children: Guy, who succeeded his father as count and duke of Lucca and margrave of Tuscany; Lambert, who succeeded his brother in 929 but lost the titles in 931 to his half-brother Boso of Tuscany, and Ermengard.
 * Ermengarde (d. 90?)
 * Odo (d. c. 879)

title: Lothair II


text:
Talk:NFL

Fixing links
I'm going through and fixing all the links that came to the redirect that was here, since I feel that Zoe was right, and I have the responsability for that.

Is it the wiki way, that monitoring for that becomes my moral obligation, since it seems likely that NEW links to nfl will pop up, and since I feel moderately strongly that the "other" NFL deserves to be linked off the NFL page..... -- RBoatright

I think that if new links are made, it's the responsibility of those who write the article to get the link correct. Don't worry about it. -- Zoe

Redirect to National Football League
I reverted the edit back to the 15 August 2003 version, because it was not discussed. I would argue that "NFL" should redirect to National Football League because it is a exteremly common abbreviation here in the United States. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:09, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * More common than National Forensic League. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:10, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * As stated on Disambiguation: "Some topics have a primary topic which editors agree is the primary meaning for the term (Rome, for example). In this case the disambiguation page is named Rome (disambiguation), and the primary topic keeps the topic word or phrase.". Since most Americans automatically think of the National Football League when they here "NFL" rather than National Forensic League, the former should be the "primary topic". Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:17, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, almost all of the thousands of articles that link directly to the NFL page pertain to American football related articles, or situations in which the reader expects to go to the National Football League article. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

National Forensic League
We should change it to the National Forensic League because jocks are stupid and they don't deserve another win. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.21.95 (talk) 02:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Obviously, you are very biased by saying "jocks are stupid and they don't deserve another win". Just read the discussion above as to why it currently redirects to National Football League]]. Also, the fact is that when you enter "NFL" into Google, it immediately lists pages pertaining to the National Football League. You have to go through a number of pages in the search result to find the first web site about the National Forensic League. Regards. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

National Forensic League started 1925. National Football League named 1922. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.125.21 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

As a sports player, that's really mean. If you want to know about the National Forensic League, search it up!Memer101 (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:National Football League which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:NFL


text:
Pistoia

Pistoia is a city and comune in the Italian region of Tuscany, the capital of a province of the same name, located about 30 km west and north of Florence and is crossed by the Ombrone Pistoiese, a tributary of the River Arno. It is a typical Italian medieval city, and it attracts many tourists, especially in the summer. The city is famous throughout Europe for its plant nurseries.

History
Pistoria (in Latin other possible forms are Pistorium or Pistoriae) was a centre of Gallic, Ligurian and Etruscan settlements before becoming a Roman colony in the 6th century BC, along the important road Via Cassia: in 62 BC the demagogue Catiline and his fellow conspirators were slain nearby. From the 5th century the city was a bishopric, and during the Lombardic kingdom it was a royal city and had several privileges. Pistoia's most splendid age began in 1177 when it proclaimed itself a free commune: in the following years it became an important political centre, erecting walls and several public and religious buildings.

In 1254 the Ghibelline town of Pistoia was conquered by the Guelph Florence; this did not pacify the town, but led to marked civil violence between "Black" and "White" Guelph factions, pitting different noble families against one another. In the Inferno of Dante, we encounter a particularly violent member of the Black faction of Pistoia, Vanni Fucci, tangled up in a knot of snakes while cursing God, who states: (I am a) beast and Pistoia my worthy lair. Pistoia remained a Florentine holding except for a brief period in the 14th century, when a former abbott, Ormanno Tedici, became Lord of the city. This did not last long, since his nephew Filippo sold the town to Castruccio Castracani of Lucca. The town was officially annexed to Florence in 1530.

One of the most famous families of the city was that of the Rospigliosi, owners of agricultural estates and wool merchants; the Rospigliosi provided a pope in 1667 with Giulio Rospigliosi, who briefly reigned as Clement IX (1667–69), and gave several cardinals to the church.

In 1786 a famous Jansenist episcopal synod was convened in Pistoia.

According to one theory, Pistoia lent its name to the pistol, which started to be manufactured in Pistoia during the 16th century. But today, it is also notable for the extensive plant nurseries spreading around it. Consequently, Pistoia is also famous for its flower markets, as is the nearby Pescia.

Geography
Pistoia borders with the municipalities of Agliana, Alto Reno Terme, Cantagallo, Lizzano in Belvedere, Marliana, Montale, Quarrata, Sambuca Pistoiese, San Marcello Piteglio and Serravalle Pistoiese.

Culture
In Anatole France's novel The Wicker-Work Woman, the Ospedale del Cappo in Pistoia is mentioned for its "vigor and truth" depicted on the "frieze of painted terracotta that surrounds the hospital". Pistoia has been a setting for numerous works of fiction and movies, including films, such as I Love You in All the Languages in the World, Amici miei, and Medici: Masters of Florence.
 * Literature
 * Cinema
 * Music

 * Pistoia Blues, an international music festival held since 1980. It is one of the most important European blues festivals. Artists such as B.B. King, Bob Dylan and David Bowie have attended and performed at the festival.
 * Giostra dell'Orso ("Joust of the Bear"), a ceremony that is mentioned even in a chronicle dating back to 1300, when a dozen riders organized a ritual combat against a bear. Despite many changes, this traditional ceremony was staged every year until 1666, when the abandonment was recorded by the ritual celebration of the people. It was restarted in 1947, and takes place on July 25.

Main sights
Although less visited than other cities in Tuscany, the medieval city within Pistoia's old walls is charming and well-preserved.

Piazza del Duomo
The large Piazza del Duomo, dominated by the cathedral, is lined with other medieval buildings, such as the Palazzo del Comune and the Palazzo del Podestà: it is the setting (in July) of the Giostra dell'Orso ("Bear Joust"), when the best horsemen of the city's traditional quarters tilt with lances at a target held up by a dummy shaped like a bear.

The original Cathedral of San Zeno (5th century) burned down in 1108, but was rebuilt during the 12th century, and received incremental improvements until the 17th century. The façade has a prominent Romanesque style, while the interior received heavy Baroque additions which were removed during the 1960s. Its outstanding feature is the Altar of St James, an exemplar of the silversmith's craft begun in 1287 but not finished until the 15th century. Its various sections contain 628 figures, the total weighing nearly a ton. The Romanesque belfry, standing at some 67 m, was erected over an ancient Lombard tower.

In the square is also the 14th-century Baptistry, in Gothic style, with white and green striped marble revetment characteristic of the Tuscan Gothic.

The Palazzo dei Vescovi ("Bishops' Palace"), is characterized by a Gothic loggiato on the first floor. It is known from 1091, initially as a fortified noble residence. In the 12th century it received a more decorated appearance, with mullioned windows and frescoes, of which traces remain. It was later modified in the mid-12th century (when the St. James Chapel, mentioned by Dante Alighieri in the XXIV canto of his Inferno) and in the 13th century; to the latter restoration belongs the white marble-decorated staircase, one of the most ancient examples in Italy in civil architecture. In the 14th century, the Chapel of St. Nicholas was decorated with stories of the namesake saint and other martyrs.

The Tower of Catilina dates to the High Middle Ages, and stands 30 m high.

Religious buildings

 * Basilica of Our Lady of Humility (Madonna dell'Umiltà) (1509), finished by Giorgio Vasari with a 59 m high cupola. The original project was by Giuliano da Sangallo, but works were begun in 1495 by Ventura Vitoni. The dome was commissioned by Cosimo I de' Medici to Vasari, the lantern completed in 1568 and the church consecrated in 1582. In the apse is a painting by Bernardino del Signoraccio (1493).
 * Santissima Annunziata, Baroque former church known for its Chiostro dei Morti ("Cloister of the Dead").
 * San Bartolomeo in Pantano (12th century).
 * San Giovanni Battista (15th century). Damaged during World War II bombardments, it is now used as an exhibition center.
 * San Giovanni Battista al Tempio (11th century), owned for a while by the Knights Templar and then by the Hospitaller Knights.
 * San Benedetto (14th century, restored in 1630). It houses an Annunciation (1390) by Giovanni di Bartolomeo Cristiani, a St Benedict with the Redeemer (16th-century) by Florentine painter, and in the cloister Histories of the Order of the Knights of St Benedict by Giovan Battista Vanni (1660).
 * San Domenico.
 * San Francesco (begun 1289). Franciscan church has an unfinished façade with bichrome marble decoration. It has frescoes with Histories of St. Francis in the main chapel and other 14th–15th century frescoes.
 * San Giovanni Fuoricivitas (12th–14th century), Romanesque church
 * San Leone (14th century) church enlarged in the 16th–18th centuries. Its Baroque-Roccoco interior houses some notable canvases by Giovanni Lanfranco, Stefano Marucelli and Vincenzo Meucci.
 * Santa Maria delle Grazie, Pistoia
 * Santa Maria in Ripalta (11th century). It houses a large Ascent of Christ fresco in the apse, attributed to Manfredino d'Alberto (1274).
 * San Paolo.
 * San Pier Maggiore.
 * Pieve di Sant'Andrea, housing Giovanni Pisano's Pulpit of St. Andrew.
 * Pieve of San Michele in Groppoli, ancient chapel now parish church.
 * La Vergine.

Others

 * The 14th-century walls. These had originally four gates, Porta al Borgo, Porta San Marco, Porta Carratica and Porta Lucchese, all demolished at the beginning of the 20th century.
 * Ospedale del Ceppo (13th century).
 * Palazzo Panciatichi
 * Medici Fortress of Santa Barbara, built at first in 1331 by the Florentines, but destroyed by the Pistoiese citizens in 1343. It was rebuilt by order of Cosimo I de' Medici from 1539, and later enlarged by Bernardo Buontalenti. It sustained one single siege by the Barberini troops in 1643, before being disarmed by Grand Duke Peter Leopold in 1734. Later it was used as a barracks and military jail, while today it serves as a venue for cinema shows during the summer.
 * Accademia dei Risvegliati
 * Palazzo Rospigliosi, Pistoia
 * Palazzo Rospigliosi a via del Duca
 * Palazzo Rospigliosi a Ripa del Sale
 * Monument in Honour of Brazilians (Soldiers and Pilots) killed in action during Italian Campaign of World War II
 * Brazilian Military Cemetery of Pistoia

Sport
The city's football team US Pistoiese 1921 plays in Serie D, the fourth flight of Italian football. The city's basketball team Pistoia Basket 2000 plays in Serie A1.
 * Football
 * Basketball

Buses
Consorzio Pistoiese Trasporti, also known as COPIT, was a company that operated since 1969 the local public transport in Pistoia and in its province. It was transformed as Società per azioni in 2000 with private and public capital, mainly by the fifteen Comuni, where operated and 30% by CTT Nord. Since 2005 made part in two consortium: BluBus and PiùBus, the first operated in the Province of Pistoia and the other in the Empoli area.

Since 1 November 2021 the public local transport is managed by Autolinee Toscane.

Train
The railway station is located on the Viareggio–Florence railway and it is at the southern end of the Porrettana railway, the original line between Florence and Bologna.

Notable residents

 * Meo Abbracciavacca, 14th century poet
 * Enrico Betti
 * Mauro Bolognini, film director
 * Giosuè Carducci
 * Cino da Pistoia
 * Pope Clement IX
 * Ippolito Desideri
 * Renato Fondi
 * Niccolò Fortiguerra
 * Vanni Fucci, fictional character
 * Licio Gelli
 * Lodovico Giustini
 * Marino Marini
 * Giovanni Michelucci
 * Maria Maddalena Morelli
 * Filippo Pacini
 * Kobe Bryant

Twin towns - sister cities
Pistoia is twinned with:
 * 🇷🇸 Kruševac, Serbia
 * 🇫🇷 Pau, France (1975)
 * 🇩🇪 Zittau, Germany

title: Pistoia


text:
Louis II of Italy

Louis II (825 – 12 August 875), sometimes called the Younger, was the king of Italy and emperor of the Carolingian Empire from 844, co-ruling with his father Lothair I until 855, after which he ruled alone.

Louis's usual title was imperator augustus ("august emperor"), but he used imperator Romanorum ("emperor of the Romans") after his conquest of Bari in 871, which led to poor relations with the Eastern Roman Empire. He was called imperator Italiae ("emperor of Italy") in West Francia while the Byzantines called him Basileus Phrangias ("Emperor of Francia").

The chronicler Andreas of Bergamo, who is the main source for Louis's activities in southern Italy, notes that "after his death a great tribulation came to Italy."

Childhood
Louis was born in 825, the eldest son of the junior emperor Lothair I and his wife Ermengarde of Tours. His father was the son of the reigning emperor, Louis the Pious. Little is known about his early life, except that he grew up in his grandfather's court and probably developed a warm affection for the emperor who, in 839, designated his grandson as King of Italy, and let Louis take up his residence in that country.

Louis the Pious died the next year, and his empire was partitioned between his sons: Louis' father, Lothair, and Louis' uncle, Louis the German, as well as their younger half-brother, Charles the Bald. Under his father's rule, he was crowned king and co-emperor to the middle-aged Emperor Lothair I at Rome by Pope Sergius II on 15 June 844. This ceremony mirrors the crowning of Lothair I by his father, a tradition started by Charlemagne and his son Louis the Pious, who were, respectively, great grandfather and grandfather of Louis II.

Joint emperor
Louis II immediately claimed the rights of an emperor in the city, a claim which was decisively rejected; but in 850 he was crowned joint emperor at Rome by Pope Leo IV, and soon afterwards, in 851, married Engelberga and undertook the independent government of Italy. He marched into the south of Italy in the year of his imperial coronation and compelled the rival dukes of Benevento, Radelchis I and Siconulf, to make peace. His mediation split the Lombard duchy and gave Radelchis his share with Benevento as his capital, whilst Salerno was given to Siconulf as an independent principality. Radelchis, now pacified, had no need of his Aghlabid mercenaries and happily betrayed them to the emperor. Louis fell on them and they were massacred. He then quashed some accusations against Pope Leo and held a Diet at Pavia. He confirmed the usurping regent Peter as prince of Salerno in December 853, displacing the dynasty he had installed there three years earlier. On the death of his father in September 855, he became sole emperor.

Carolingian interventions
The division of Lothair's dominions, by which he obtained no territory outside Italy, aroused his discontent, and in 857 he allied himself with Louis the German against his own brother Lothair II, and King Charles the Bald. But after Louis had secured the election of Pope Nicholas I in 858, he reconciled with his brother, and received some lands south of the Jura mountains in return for assistance given to Lothair in his efforts to obtain a divorce from his wife, Teutberga.

In 863, upon the death of his brother Charles, Louis received the kingdom of Provence, and in 864 came into collision with Pope Nicholas I over his brother's divorce. The archbishops, who had been deposed by Nicholas for proclaiming this marriage invalid, obtained the support of the emperor, who reached Rome with an army in February 864; but, having been seized with fever, he made peace with the pope and left the city.

Bari
In his efforts to restore order in Italy, Louis saw considerable success both against Italy's turbulent princes and against the Aghlabids who were ravaging southern Italy. In 866, after issuing a call for assistance to fight the Muslims, he routed these invaders, but could not follow up his successes owing to the lack of a fleet. So in 869 he made alliance with the eastern emperor, Basil I, who sent him ships to assist in the capture of Bari, capital of the Emirate of Bari, which succumbed in 871.

Meanwhile, his brother Lothair had died in 869, and owing to his detention in southern Italy, Louis failed to prevent the partition of Lotharingia between Louis the German and Charles the Bald. Some jealousy between Louis and Basil followed the victory at Bari, and in reply to an insult from the eastern emperor Louis attempted to justify his right to the title "emperor of the Romans."

Benevento
He had withdrawn into Benevento to prepare for a further campaign when he was attacked in his palace, robbed and imprisoned by Adelchis, prince of Benevento, in August 871. The capture of Louis was lamented in a contemporary short poem, the Rythmus de captivitate Ludovici imperatoris. The landing of fresh bands of Aghlabids compelled Adelchis to release his prisoner a month later, and Louis was forced to swear he would take no revenge for this injury, nor ever enter Benevento with an army. Returning to Rome, he was released from his oath, and was crowned a second time as emperor by Pope Adrian II in May 872.

Louis won further successes against the Aghlabids, relieving the siege of Salerno and driving them from Capua, but the emperor's attempts to punish Adelchis were not very successful. Returning to northern Italy, he died, near Ghedi, in what is now the province of Brescia, on 12 August 875, having named as his successor in Italy his cousin Carloman, son of Louis the German. Louis was buried in the Basilica of Sant'Ambrogio in Milan.

Family
On 5 October 851 Louis married Engelberga, daughter of Adelchis I of Spoleto. They had two daughters:

 * Gisela (852/855-before 28 April 868), Abbess of the Monastery of San Salvador of Brescia from the year 861.
 * Ermengard, who married Boso of Provence

title: Louis II of Italy