This board has been a little to quiet for while.

Is it time that Bush and Blair who is a close friend and confidant of Bush were tried for War Crimes?

Do you think the use by the American Administrations of renditions are War Crimes and committed with full knowledge of American and British leaders ie. Blair and Bush and they are ultimately responsible?

Also in the aftermath of the illegal invasion of Iraq are should their action seen to be as the provocation for the rising toll of British, American and Iraqi deaths.

As a result of the military intervention in Iraq do you think you are safer in Britain to-day?

Do you think one should expect government leaders and ministers who have been responsible for massive foreseeable casualties should visit the hospitals to meet the casualties they have produced directly or indirectly by their actions?

kivver...no not yet...like i said first time here...my computer is being attacked on advfn so have cancelled my subscription

Always the devils advocate, maestro, I could make an entirely convincing (and fictitious) film showing how just and deserved the war was. Its not quite Empirical Evidence.
Despite all the debate, I am yet to understand how the world would have been a better, more just place, with that cuddly little rogue Saddam still in place.
Those against the war argue such things as Truth, Justice and Freedom. The sun will rise tomorrow and truth will be as slippery and hard to find as ever, I doubt there will be an awful lot of Justice in the world and I am certain you will not find freedom. However i am equally certain that Saddam will be under lock and key, and we are all better for it.
Dont forget. the atrocities you read about every day, of market places car bombed and police stations torched are perpetrated by other Iraqis. Not the allies. The airstrikes and attacks are done to bring these atrocities to an end.
To read some of the media (and some of the posts on here) you would think the CIA are crawling around Iraq, with heavy suntans and wearing a dish-dash, planting bombs everywhere.
Alan

alan...yes but was it worth mudering 3000 in the twin towers to get rid of Saddam...ask that to the people who lost loved ones in the twin towers...by the way the film is full of factual evidence unlike the 9/11 Commission report that was drawn up by crooked masons and bent politicians

The film is full of ALLEGEDLY factual evidence.
One of the things that would have prevented Saddam and Iraq from ever becoming a real nightmare is the legal ability to challenge the regime in an independant court of law, and if not in that country, then in an independant one. A challange in Iraq would lead to a very short and predictable future.
The argument put forward then is simple. if the film is true and the commission false, then why is the most litagious country in the world not full of challenges to the authorities? Why is our beloved UK not hauled before the multitudes of European legal beaurocrats?
because there is no evidence at all worth answering.
For those that believe it is all a big put up, by sunglassed men in smokey rooms, I leave you to your JFK theories and working out what really happened at Roswell. No amount of debate will convince you otherwise.
Alan

WTC7 building was not hit by a plane yet fell in 8 seconds ...what more proof do you need?..that one event should sentence the US Conspirators to a long jail sentence or lethal injection...tell me how did a bunch of ragheads manage to 'pull' the WTC7 BUILDING without getting caught?...did they parachute out of the planes just before impact and then somehow guided themselves on top of WTC7 and then planted bombs from their rucksacks?

i would love to go iraq and ask the people which era they prefer, now or then. times the number of people dead, murdered, disabled, destroyed, or distraught by their number of friends and relatives. I dont think for one minute iraqis would say they prefer now. even the iraqis that were with us and the states are slowly turning against us. i think the best thing would be to break it up into 5 different countries, but wh'll get the bits with the oil in (which of course its got absolutely nothing to do with)?? People soon forget Iraqi people are people just like me and you and im not sure everyone thinks that. i bet every single one us wouldnt like it to happen in our back yard.

one other thing worth remembering under sadam the majority were the minority (when it came to power). Iraqis bombing iraqis is the exact reason some us didnt want the war because we knew this would happen, the factions are so different and miles apart, culturely, morally and politically.

All far too "badge man" for me, Maestro. Why is it so difficult for the vocal minority of this country to accept that Muslims / iraqis have just as much right to be stupid, murderous and cowardly as we in the west?
Kivver, you propose a motion of allowing anyone, anywhere in the world to do whatever takes their fancy to any human being alive, providing its not you or yours. Humanitarian?
Splitting up Iraq will bring the same silly liberalist cries that followed India, Ireland, Cyprus et al.
Only the media turn against us, in order to sell papers. that is not any justification at all.
If you wish to conduct a straw poll in Iraq, please ask the Kurds and Shi-ites who suffered the tyranny. As you point out, they are the majority, and I think you will find they acknowledge the hardship and short term loss, but also the long term hope and future. Hope and future are things they did not know existed under Saddam.
Perhaps you are right, though. So when a despot seizes power in this country (No silly jokes we are a democracy) and declares everyone born or bred in the West Midlands to be fit for nothing more than slavery or target practice, you will happily accept your fate and not pray for the day the world rids us of that tyranny, regardless of cost?
Alan

Alan..you didn't answer the question re- WTC7 building

Would have done, had I understood it.
As far as i recall both towers were struck.
But a very salient point is that Iraq was not invaded due to any terrorism actions in New York. That was the start of a global realisation that terrorism need not be confined to the geographical area in which it is conceived, but rather can be carried to any corner of the planet a terrorist wishes to strike.
Iraq was invaded because Saddam would not allow the nuclear inspectorate to do their jobs, despite years of warning. regime change was a very welcome side effect and the end of decades of Iraqis suffering at the whim of a turtuous and bloodthirsty family was the result.
A greater result was that nations such as Iran take the threat of force more seriously now.
Can you imagine our friend the Ayatollah if we had run scared from Saddam? Even now he would be calculating how to achieve his desired aim of wiping israel off the map. His scientists would be doing their best to devise a nuclear device where the "mushroom" cloud was replaced by a "Cartoon of the prophet" cloud, to remind us why our green and pleasant land was lain waste and scattered with the bodies of infidels.
No. 9/11 was not the cause of the Iraq war. It was merely a wake-up call.
We have awoken and the world is a safer place. Iraq too will be safer. The atrocities are terrorist acts and appeasement makes them worse. Over the centuries we have learned the only way to deal with terrorists is to have no tolerance and to stand firm and strong. If we leave Iraq, we hand victory to terrorism.
We were right to go and we are right to stay and see through a difficult job. Future generations will thank us for it, but would curse us if we did any other.
Alan

Long Live the Empire!

Bye the way what happened to it?

alan..you really must do your research on wtc building 7 because it is the smoking gun to uncover the gigantic lie of 9/11..no plane hit it yet it collapsed in 8 seconds and was brought down by controlled demolition...Silverstein collected the insurance money which he took out a policy a few weeks before 9/11 ..hmmmm very convenient...nice bit of blood money there

LOL

I love these conspiracy theories.

Next it will be the old one about the US not really landing on the moon!

Some comments and all IMHO, NAG, DYOP (Do Your Own Pondering)

For those well-resourced or have storages to have horded several decades of old magazines and newspapaers (electronic versions are too easily changed or bits added or removed)... It might make very interesting reading and revealing comparisons to read past media articles about Iraq and Saddam published during the period between his rise to power to just before the invasion of Kuwait.

People's don't have good long term memories and some romanticise terrible past events. The longer we stay, the more likely more ordinary Iraqis will start to
compare UK unfavourably, but unjustly, against how life was like, or felt to be more certain, under Saddam's regime :-(

If the wellbeing of ordinary Iraqi were the genuine first concern and most important reason for the Iraq invasion, then we have utterly failed :-((

Have the liberators taken much more for themselves than the liberated?

Money-for-peerage is a different but, IMO, much more worrying and poisonous cancer closer to home. Perhaps there have been money-for-legislations or money-for-government-policy, all done with winks and knowing hints ???
...
(worthy of a new thread?)

Again, all IMHO, NAG, ...

Was it not this day three years ago when journalist Terry Lloyd was killed in Iraq?

Haystack, I think you will find moon landings in the "loonie" thread :-)

Try this

from maestro.

LOL

http://www.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=9568406

seems were going in circles, despot sadam was supported by us and the yanks and supported in his tryanny and postively encouraged to attack Iran, the west even supplied him with him most of his weapons. Remember the kurds are displaced race around the world. Oh well its getting to politically for me and i am a big softie, but how do you bring so many different factions together. All the explanations in the world will not convince me we are making a good job of it.

ps who was the man standing on the moon who filmed armstrong taking the first ever steps on the moon??

The very first steps were photographed by a TV camera attached to the outside of the Eagle and turned on by Armstrong.

NAS4 attached a camera to an extended arm on the landing craft. This camera was lined up with the exit port and was operated from within the craft.

cheers haystack, and why was the flag waving in the wind on the moon, thought there was no wind on the moon???

Perhaps, the Americans were farting again.