Since the hypocrisy of the United States calling for international law to be observed is only lost to the mainstream media, the uber rich, and the bought and paid for of this society with the attention span of a worm, here is a quickie about Iraq vs. Crimea.
I. Iraq Invasion Was Illegal
The war in Iraq did not end when the United States was kicked out, not by a long shot (2). The violence in Iraq is on the rise and for decades to come we will have to deal with what the United States and its allies have unleashed.
It’s anyone’s guess if those responsible for this war of aggression (crime against peace) will ever be held accountable for their crimes, what we do know, however, is that the decision to invade Iraq has transformed the global political landscape because according to the UN charter, the invasion was illegal:
“Kofi Annan, declared explicitly… that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal. Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service… he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: ‘Yes, if you wish.’Since this post is about the hypocrisy of the fervor regarding Crimea from oligarchs, puppets, and the brain dead, we’ll skip the details of the devastation and the bloodbath that ensued the invasion of Iraq and continues to this day in places like Fallujah.
“He then added unequivocally: ‘I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal.’”
Dahr Jamail on what happened in Fallujah in 2004: U.S. War Crimes in Iraq
If you do feel the need to understand what really took place, then the following lecture by Scott Ritter provides it. The lecture, which in my opinion should be mandatory viewing for every American and part of every high school curriculum, explains what took place in the buildup to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the opening of Pandora's Box:
“The US ambassador to Baghdad conceded yesterday  that the Iraq invasion had opened a Pandora's box of sectarian conflicts which could lead to a regional war and the rise of religious extremists who ‘would make Taliban Afghanistan look like child's play’.”
Scott Ritter - Iraq Confidential
II. Crimea and the 100 Orders Imposed on Iraq
Crimea “is an autonomous republic in the southwestern region of Ukraine, located on the Crimean Peninsula on the North shore of the Black Sea with a predominantly Russian ethnic majority (58%).” The region was part of Russia until 1954 when it was transferred to Ukraine as a ‘symbolic gesture’ by the Soviet Union.
It is also important to note that Russia’s Black Sea Fleet has been located in Crimea since 13 May 1783, since before the United States was even a recognized country.
On 16 March 2014, the citizens of Crimea voted in a referendum and “97% of voters backed breaking away from Ukraine and joining Russia.” The vote was held approximately three weeks after the democratically elected government of Ukraine was violently overthrown by a western supported coup d'état:
“What I’d do is not have USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy working with U.S. taxpayers’ money to knock off an elected government in Ukraine, which is what they did. I wouldn’t try to force the people of Ukraine into a deal with NATO against their interest or into a deal with the European Union, which is against their economic interest.” - Dennis Kucinich.
I would like to address one main point that many people in the western world keep on bringing up, specifically, that ‘the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was never about occupying or annexing the region forever, while what’s going on in Crimea is about the permanent takeover of the region by Russia’ [sic]. On this issue, we should always remember “Bremer’s 100 orders: The true scale of Iraq’s rape and destruction”, specifically, that one of the main reasons of the invasion of Iraq was to begin the privatization of the region, i.e., the western corporate takeover of the Middle East.
The best example of this new ‘market economy’ being forced on Iraqis from the 100 orders, “binding instructions or directives to the Iraqi people that create penal consequences or have a direct bearing on the way Iraqis are regulated, including changes to Iraqi law” - illegal orders mind you based on “The Law of Land Warfare” - was Order 81, the ‘corporate control’ of the country:
“When former Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) administrator L. Paul Bremer III left Baghdad after the so-called ‘transfer of sovereignty’ in June 2004, he left behind the 100 orders he enacted as chief of the occupation authority in Iraq. Among them is Order 81 on ‘Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety.’ This order amends Iraq's original patent law of 1970 and unless and until it is revised or repealed by a new Iraqi government, it now has the status and force of a binding law. With important implications for farmers and the future of agriculture in Iraq, this order is yet another important component in the United States' attempts to radically transform Iraq's economy….Much more information on western hypocrisy regarding Ukraine at: “What’s Really Going On: Bahrain vs. Ukraine, Can You Spot the Difference?”
“The new law is presented as being necessary to ensure the supply of good quality seeds in Iraq and to facilitate Iraq's accession to the WTO. What it will actually do is facilitate the penetration of Iraqi agriculture by the likes of Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer and Dow Chemical - the corporate giants that control seed trade across the globe. Eliminating competition from farmers is a prerequisite for these companies to open up operations in Iraq, which the new law has achieved. Taking over the first step in the food chain is their next move.”