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?

Not a bad idea except for the Academics, legal beavers, representatives from large and small businesses, even a scattering of ex-politicians, social services. military, farming community, architects, medical and support services, civil services, old age pensioners, (at least two or three),middle age, youth groups. even some from the female species. ;-)
I just want to go and live on a little island somewhere and drink myself to death in the company of several swedish lady athletes and a never ending supply of Cuban cigars.
Any chamber (1st or 2nd) that can provide me with that gets my vote.
Alan

You wouldn't last the evening out!!! 8-)

I could try.
Might ask MAM to sponsor it, like they have done for that guy in Vegas, and I could write a thread.
Alternatively I am considering calling it performance art, entitled death of a playboy and applying for Arts Commission lottery funding. They could (and have) spend the money on worse things.
Alan

Can we club together to pay for the small island and Swedish lady athletes?

Be my guest ;-)

My Mam wouldn't let me go there. 8-)

I will ask my Dad he might.

Looking a bit dodgy for Tory Blair don't you think?

Re the question in the header

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

No.

Is it safer in France ? Yes.

Do I think i am any less safe in Britain today?
No.
Is Iraq a reason, or an excuse? that may be a more pertinant question.
Alan

Iraq was a major provocation to militant Islamic Fundamentalism.

As Bush, Blair and his henchmen were advised before, but for their own reasons did not assess or accept the probable results intelligently. Probably beyond them in their simplistic view of politics.

They were to conceited to accept advice about the post war management Iraq and we see the consequences.

Unfortunately, this duo with the help of the present Israeli administration by their criminal actions in Lebanon have endangered World Peace and provoked World Terrorism throughout the world, especially in Britain and America.

No, we are not safer since the War on Terrorism speeches by the duo and we will waste many years and much money trying to suppress the "terrorists" who are seen by many "Arabs as Freedom Fighters".

At the end of the day it will come back to negotiation by those participants left sitting around a table.

Well, I'll plump for excuse.
Had it not been Iraq, it would be Afghanistan, or Israel or even a few cartoons in a Danish newspaper.
He who seeks terror will find it. Al Qaida had already warned of deaths but they had blamed 3 of the 4 points i have just mentioned. Israel is nothing at all to do with us. It is a local battle between Hezbollah and the Israelis. It is not within our power to do anything about it except invade and end it by force of arms. Afghanistanis are relieved beyond belief that the years of the Taliban are passed. the only ones unhappy are the Taliban. We have done to death the Iraq argument, and I still believe we were right to do as we did. The danish newspapers are out of our control and yet we had threats of mass murder on Londons streets because of it.
And to those who point to countries who were not involved in the Iraq war and say, look how safe they are. think India, Think Indonesia. Think Australia. Your point loses validity.
No. Iraq is an excuse for purveying a perverted view of religion and instilling fear and terror across the world, for nothing more than the grandisment of Osama Bin Laden. These things would happen with or without that war.
Alan

H6 You are entitled to plump for the terminology, which supports your cause.

A little time ago I think you seemed to advance the opinion that the invasion of Iraq by America and Britain was a successful and that the aftermath would also be a success. To many this would appear not to be so.

We are involved in the Israeli Lebanese conflict due to Blairs close association with Bush and his permitting of WMD passage through this country to support Israel in yet again another criminal and futile war.

Remember America has supplied Israel with much of its weapons of mass destruction as they did Saddam when he used to suppress his own countrymen and to enter a war with Iran etc..

Blair is responsible in that he is not condemning the criminal actions of Israel in the disproportionate use of force in Lebanon. The Arab States and the world had noted his and America reluctance to do so. I think, one of the reasons for not doing so (amongst other factors,) is due to the large financial backing that the Jewish community gives to the political parties in America. (The Jewish Lobby.) Similar pressure may be being exerted on Blair, especially some of his previous actions may be leading to the bankruptcy of the Labour Party.

The majority of people through out the world see the actions of America and Britain in invading Iraq, coupled with the criminal disproportionate force use by Israel in Lebanon as provoking and probably leading to further conscription to the various groups of Militant Islamic Fundamentalists.

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, I do not feel we are in receipt of true information as yet of the real state of that conflict. I hope that the intervention may lead to a peaceful stage in that countrys history and lead to its independence and national development. But I think a claim that the war against drugs and the Taliban is successful is still in doubt.

I think if you check Australia was involved in Iraq. It would be reasonable to consider whether there are other factors of disagreements between the Indonesians and Australia.

Also, it may be reasonable to check the background motivation for the terrorist actions in India and Indonesia. We are labelling them terrorists, but indigenous populations many see them as Freedom Fighters.

It seems to be reasonable to consider the forced settlement of borders by British governments on Pakistan, Kashmir and India as part of the problem. This is part of the underlying disagreements and the resort to violence there.

Before condemning the terrorists for the use of violence and murder I think it would be reasonable to examine the violent examples demonstrated by America, Britain and Israel over recent years.

Also, one should recognise the attempts by America, to diminish the authority of the United Nations and yet ultimately call on them to bail them out and to police the chaos they have created and allow them to go home.

The United Nations with all its weaknesses would still seem to the route to decent world society.

Religion is often the flag under or around which the discontented congregated to voice their discontentment.

The way to deal with deal with these situations is to address the underlying grievances

As you say, fred, one of the wonderful things about our fair country is the ability to express ourselves as we wish and disagree freely. I still believe iraq will turn out right, just as I believe, and have stated in the past, the yanks are entirely the wrong people to be there now.
The startling thing about it all is that in Iraq, people are happy to throw facts and figures around, opinions and statistics and quote from any and every source to support their argument. When it comes to the more clear cut areas, the reasoning descends to "we are not in receipt of true information yet". If I put that to support my stance then you would, quite rightly, shoot me down in flames!!
The words disproportionate force are bandied around over Israel, and to be fair, i know not how one defines disproportionate. Acts of war are committed and Israel retaliates. Who stuck first is one even historians cannot agree on, for it goes back millenia. The problem is that Israel is a country, and those committing an act of war have a higher alleigance. Where then, do israel retaliate in order to remove the threat to their innocent civilians? if you agree that the first responsibility of any government is the defence of its nation, it must have that right.
Terrorists are cowards who, as you say, use religion as a flag to hide behind, but we must not let this succeed,lest anarchy reign worldwide. We must look beyond the flag of convenience and root them out.
I am no great fan of Israel, nor am I of Lebanon or the surrounding Arab states that perpetuate the idea that there must be no jewish state in the region. If I knew the answers there then I would be a great world leader, but I do defend the right of any nation to defend itself.
Australia may well have been very lightly connected with the Iraq war, I am not certain. I am certain, however,that Indonesia was not directly linked. Indonesia is also a Muslim state, so to claim that Al Qaidas cause is an Islamic one is false. It is one of global terror and domination. it is a fear and repugnance of western values.
The splitting of India / pakistan was wanted by the various religions of that continent. The argument is over the precise nature of the border. Wherever it was put, there would be dispute. We have seen this even in our ancient isle, over the precise nature of places like berwick-upon-Tweed and Todmordon. To blame a government and a nation some 50 years later is a little rich.
we come back to the age old question. How do we, and the Israelis, fight global terrorism. We have witnessed first hand that unpredictable things like harmless cartoons can lead to death threats and terrorism. We know that the demands of the terrorists are impossible for us to comply with and they refuse entirely to negotiate on the demands. What then is left, other than to hunt them down and remove them from society?
To go down the path of appeasement means no more Israel. No more UN. No more Nato. No more freedom within our own country. To negotiate means that we encourage every minority group, every disenfranchised handful of people and every group who disagree with an alternative view of life to take up arms. In short we make a bad situation worse. Any show of weakness is to encourage this.
Finally, I would submit that it was not the USA who diminished the authority of the UN. It was those couple of countries who vetoed the demands of the majority of the UN. Those couple of countries who, when the chips were down, did not have the courage to sanction the action that the majority of the UN had voted in favour of. They took the easy option of hoping it would go away rather than take tough decisions, and now the world pays the price.
There is no defence for terrorism. War is justifiable. terrorism is not. It is cowardly and despicable and I will not act as an apologist for the Bin ladens of this world. The right and proper way to create changes is through debate, reason and the ballot box. This has not worked for the extremists. it never does. I would welcome the forces of Al qaida to present a party, with manifesto and candidates in every nation across the globe. they will not because their beleif is not for democracy, but for the rule of fear. Where they do hold sway, there is no political movement. there is no debate. Disagreement means torture and death. so how do we negotiate with these people and find out what their grievences are? We cannot. And do you really think that withdrawl from Iraq and Afghanistan and stopping any support for Israel would appease them and make us safe? Of course not. They would move on to the next demand, bouyed by the knowledge that we would give them whatever they ask for.
As you said fred. We are all entitled to our opinion, and I respect yours, but I cannot agree with it.
alan

And just to add to that, I read this morning that a UN resolution to end hostilities has been unanimously passed. The only waverer was Lebanon!! They damanded that the UN drop the clause that sends 15000 UN peacekeepers to the area to ensure no more violence.
One might even think that it does not suit Lebanons purpose to see an end to violence. Perhaps they wish only an end to israeli violence and be left free to continue terrorism the othe way.

Alan,
Again, what you are seeing is an attempt to impose the will of America on Lebanon.

It is right for them if they think the impositions suggested that they object.

America in this case is the puppet of Israel and is attempting to override general Arab opinion.

I believe there was a suggestion by America and the United Nations that a United Nations force should be used in Northern Ireland to imposed a "peace". It was rejected by the British government at the time.

It is also to be recognised that in spite of this agreement at the United Nations that Israel has continued with it criminal actions and murder of children and other non active participants.

As far as terrorists being cowards, I feel you must be a far braver than I am. To give up my life for a cause I believe in would seem to me extremely courageous. Misguided it may be.

I think it would be far more cowardly to sit in a cockpit of a plane playing video games with real rockets and real people etc.. (Perhaps, Blair and Bush had a childhood diet of video games, which accounts for their lack of understanding and reality.) Cowboys and Indians all over again.

America and Britain are still attempting to impose their will over the Arab states and other underdeveloped nations of the world, by doing so disregard the will of those people.

They eventual will fail and pass into history. The only problem is the unnecessary misery they have caused.

I personally cannot see them failing eventually as they will never, ever take on a power that has the capability to send them into history. Their sheer military might can, I believe, suppress the will of Many Arab states.
And when we need Oil like America does now then I think we can predict that more of these skirmishes will break out in the future in a battle for resources not peace.

And by the way if any of you have a feeling like 'this is the end', then three or so years back the Bible code put forward a prediction that in 2006 there will be a nuclear holocaust which begins in Jerusalem. Uh oh.

Fact, muslim men kill more muslim women and children every year, by a factor of ten to one.....

The strike in Indonesia was in Bali which is a Hindu country and presumably an easy way to attack Australians (who supported Iraq invasion) since it is a very popular holiday destination. India too sent some troops.

It may indeed be, to some extent, 'facile' (Kim Howells today in response to letter from various MPs and peers) to suggest a direct correlation between invasion of Iraq and latest attempt to blow up planes. That's the same in many areas of life - hard to prove cause and effect directly. Al-Qaida/other Muslim extremists may have got round to delivering something nasty to us given their fanaticism, but that possibility has clearly been accelerated by Blair's stance with Bush, provided easy excuses for further terror and a rich recruiting ground for disaffected British Muslim radicals easily brainwashed. Up until Iraq, Al-Quaida hand their hands full thinking of ways to deal with America, Israel and Egypt.

The Iraq war has failed to achieve a single American foreign policy objective. It has not made the USA safer, it has not advanced the war on terror, it has not made Iraq a stable state, it has not spread democracy to the Middle East and it has not enhanced US access to oil. Sadly, such an excellent summary is not mine but that of Peter Galbraith, former US ambassador and expert in the region, in his recent book The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End.

A lot of the book deals with the disastrous foreign policy of the West in the region since 1921. The only beneficiaries of Washingtons (and ours) current policy are Al Qaeda, the Iranians and their ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons.

Everyone outside the Whitehouse knows we are in a mess, even Amercican soldiers, and crucially that a unified Iraq is not a possibilty. The brutal conclusion is for the US and Britsh forces to leave; to attempt to create an independent Kurdish state and let the Shiite and Sunni factions settle matters for themselves. We have done this in the past many times by pulling out of our imperial nations conquered. The sooner we quit the better. What follows may be bloody but that is the case now.

Here is Max Hastings (not exactly noted for liberalism) in The Sunday Times today, reviewing Galbraiths book: Bushs adventures in Iraq, with Blairs enthusiastic and impertinent support, has inflicted a catastrophe on Western foreign policy in the Islamic world: The Wars architects believed they could change the Middle East. And so they did. For decades to come, while the two great statesmen enjoy richly upholstered retirements, the rest of us will have to live with the consequences of their folly and cultural conceit.