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?

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.

IF YOU'RE A MUSLIM - IT'S YOUR PROBLEM



WHEN will the Muslims of Britain stand up to be counted?



When will they declare, loud and clear, with no qualifications or quibbles about Britain's foreign policy, that Islamic terrorism is WRONG?



Most of all, when will the Muslim community in this country accept an absolute, undeniable, total truth: that Islamic terrorism is THEIR problem? THEY own it. And it is THEIR duty to face it and eradicate it.



To stop the denial, endless fudging and constant wailing that somehow it is everyone else's problem and, if Islamic terrorism exists at all, they are somehow the main victims.



Because until that happens the problem will never be resolved. And there will be more 7/7s and, sometime in the future, another airplane plot will succeed with horrific loss of innocent life.



Equally important, those British politicians who have seemed obsessed with pandering to, and even encouraging, this state of denial, must throw off their politically-correct blinkers and recognise the same truththat Muslim terrorism in Britain is the direct responsibility of British Muslims.



If only they would follow the lead of Home Secretary John Reid, whose tough, pragmatic, clear-sighted approach has been a breath of fresh air. Only then can they properly work out how to tackle it.



For instance, every airport in Britain is in chaos over the plane bomb-plot alert as every passenger is subjected to rigorous security checks. Why? They take lots of time, lots of staff, and are extremely expensive.



I'm a white 62-year-old 6ft 4ins suit-wearing ex-copI fly often, but do I really fit the profile of suicide bomber? Does the young mum with three tots? The gay couple, the rugby team, the middle-aged businessman?



No. But they are all getting exactly the same amount and devouring huge resources for no logical reason whatsoever. Yet the truth is Islamic terrorism in the West has been universally carried out by young Muslim men, usually of ethnic appearance, almost always travelling alone or in very small groups. A tiny percentage, I bet, of those delayed today have such characteristics.



This targeting of airport resources is called passenger profilingthe Israelis invented it and they've got probably the safest airports and airlines in the world.



In all my years at the front line of fighting terrorism, one truth was always clear communities beat terrorists, not governments or security forces. But communities can't beat terrorism unless they have the will to do so. My heart sank this week as I saw and read the knee-jerk reaction of friends and neighbours of those arrested in this latest incident, insisting it was all a mistake and the anti-terrorist squad had the wrong people.



I have no idea whether those arrested are guilty or not. But neither have those friends and neighbours. They spoke as if it was inconceivable such a thing could happen in their community; that those arrested were all good Muslims; that Islam is a religion of peace so no Muslim could dream of planning such an act.



But we heard the same from the family and friends of the 7/7 bombers, didn't we?



And the two young British Muslims who died as suicide bombers in Israel. Then there are the British Muslims known to have become suicide bombers in Iraq.



There is currently a huge, long-running and complex alleged Islamist bomb plot being tried at the Old Bailey. And a fistful of other cases of alleged Muslim terrorism plots such as the 21/7 London Underground case are also awaiting trial.



All this would suggest the blindingly obviousthat terrorism is a major problem for the Muslim community of Britain. Of course, there will be instant squealings that this is racism. It's not. It's exactly the same as recognising that, during the Northern Ireland troubles that left thousands dead, the IRA were totally based in the Catholic community and the UVF in the Protestant.



And that, most importantly, IRA terrorism only began to draw to a close when that Catholic community it was based in decided as a whole that it was no longer prepared to back violence as the only way forward. Interestingly, it was Catholic revulsion over republican terrorist atrocities such as Enniskillen and Omagh that fuelled that change.



Well, Muslim terrorism in Britain is based in, has its roots in, and grows in, our Muslim community. The madmen of 7/7 and other suicide bombings didn't hide among the Hindu communities, worship in the Sikh temples, recruit at Catholic churches, did they? It may be true that events in Iraq have angered sections of the Muslim community. I have no doubts, whatever Tony Blair says, that it was a catalyst. I also think it's entirely fair for Muslims, if they wish, to vocally oppose Britain's continuing involvement there.



I can recognise, too, that recent events in Lebanon inflame some people, and they want their voices of protest heard. The absolutely unacceptable problem is that this opposition is used by too many to turn a blind eye to, or excuse, terrorists in their midst.



Blasting a passenger airliner out of the sky, killing hundreds of innocent men, women and children, is NEVER acceptable. Under any circumstances. There is NEVER an excuse.



A terrible tragedy costing Muslim lives in Lebanon or Iraq or Afghanistan is never ever an excuse for terrorism here.



It is totally unacceptable, totally wrong. What one party perceives as a wrong, no matter how strongly they feel, does not, in turn, justify another wrong being done to avenge it.



And until every single member of the Muslim community believes that and preaches thatfrom an ordinary parent to imam or madrassa teacherterrorism can't be beaten.



Politicians must accept this truth, and do something about it. One example would be to tackle this chaos at our airports and the passenger profiling I described earlier. Another must is to reconsider ID cards. The importance of knowing whether someone really is who they say they are has never been higher.



This must be combined with improved border controls, logging exactly who goes OUT of the country as well as who comes in should also be reconsidered, whatever the politically correct among us may say. The time terrorism suspects are kept in custody before charge has also caused dissent. Currently the maximum is 28 daysit may well be this should be reconsidered and, if necessary, raised again to, say, 42 days.



Plainly, Muslim terrorism isn't going away. We need to consider everything in our battle to defeat it. But that's the responsibility of all.



Not least the community where, sadly for them, it is festering.

Barwoni,
you have stated with great eloquance what the silent majority feel very strongly to be the case.
I wholeheartedly support much of your view, and also believe that the tide of ridiculous political correctness that has swept this country for 20+ years, has hamstrung simple common sense as a way to deal with our nations problems. To not use profiling is to ask police to interview women as suspects in rape cases and babes in arms as drug dealers.
Many may think this as a racist approach. I think of it as a realist approach.
Alan

good speach barwoni, I agree with everything you say - but put yourself as an Iraqi living in England when you hear that British troops have destroyed your village, some anger will be provoked, and they have very few ways to fight back.
If their was a reversal of roles and my country was the one being destroyed then I certainly wouldnt 'vocally' raise my concerns, Id do something about them.
Dont take this as me saying that killing Innocent lives is right as I am strongly against any attack on people not directly responsible, but it is their cowardly way of attacking Britain as a whole and I cant see this changing any time soon until our own radical solution is put in place - we're going to have to live with it.

Barwoni,

How many women and children have the American and Israeli boys killed by their planes bombing and rocketing Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza?


How many of those families are going to harbour grievances for years to come. They will be the breeding ground for future terrorism.

I think some might be interested to read the article written by Simon Jenkins in the Sunday Times today.

I always thought Simons Jenkins a right winger but this evaluation of American British policy is I think similar to moderate opinion throughout the world.

I don't think you can erase terrorism by killing terrorists. It is necessary to "attack" the cause of terrorism which the terrorists feed off.

I wondered if this was being discussed.

Suggest viewing of the following may be of interest.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1219021.ece

Random thoughts on terrorism.
I think it fair to say that iraq is not the cause of terrorism. Neither is Afghanistan or Israel. They are excuses.
I also think it fair to say that terrorism is crime on a global and catastrophic scale.
What is it that really feeds crime, especially one where financial gain is not the motivation?
Many may argue that being disenfranchised is the basic cause. There is a flaw right there. The recent terrorism acts have been attempted by those who have been treat very well by the society they seek to destroy. they even have democracy weighted in their favour and all powerful bodies to ensure they are no disenfranchised. In support of this I point you to the Muslim parliament and the numerous race relation laws and government bodies.
Some may argue that it is retaliation. Perhaps so, but this is not justification. if you came around and murdered my wife i would not have the right to murder you. That would be anarchic. (In truth I would probably take you out for a drink and help you dispose of the body). The state has a right, if they wish to execute you, I don't.
my own belief is that it is perpetuated by those who try and justify it, and in doing so, provide propaganda and succour to those who carry it out.
For many years we, in this country, have sought to explain away criminal elements on the basis of being outcasts, unlucky, peripheral to society, and it is societys fault. we have taken thoroughly nasty criminals and sought to excuse their actions. we now do the same with terrorists.
It's because we did this, its because we didn't do that.
No. I disagree. It is merely the way any minority tries to impose its will on a majority. it must not be allowed to succeed.
Hand wringing liberals and amatuer social workers justify and excuse and ask the majority to change society to fit the minority. This is the wrong way around. We must ensure there is no place in society for such a violent minority.
Re-education is one answer, but this would be slammed instantly by the same apologists as racist and disallowing people their own culture. No it would not. All Muslims tell us that Islam is a culture of peace and love.
Complete removal from society is another way.
I am no racist, and I am not proposing the ridiculous "send 'em all back" argument. But how about the UAE model of immigration control?
All non nationals of whatever creed or colour are never allowed to gain nationality. They are very welcome, and nobody is turned away, but they must have work to go to and they must re-apply for a visa on a continuous basis. Their children never qualify for nationality either.
The reason this works so well is that any wrongdoing at all leads to expulsion. No-one seeks to justify it or change society to accomodate it. They simply remove it. Crime in any form is almost unheard of. The indiginous population fear the law as they know it is not merciful, and the country prospers.
Alas it changes, with the influx of foreign property investors and tourists, and a creeping attitude that succes demands a more liberal approach.
We allow almost anything and justify and excuse the terrible. the terrorists gain the feeling they are winning the hearts and minds of a weak population and that success is close, they can force a change in policy. We must send them the signal that there is absolutely no chance ever of terrorism changing policy or attitude. We must send them the signal that our way of life, our culture and our moderate society are dear to us and will not be watered down. To do so would be to remove the end aim of the terrorists, to give them no hope of ever achieving their aims. This would serve to bring about a down scaling of the problem (terrorism will always exist).
To send the opposite signal, to excuse and justify, to blame ourselves, to change our society to fit, to give homes forever to those who seek to destroy us is a recipe for prolonging an agonising battle that will cost many more lives yet.
I will take the racist accusations on the chin. I am not racist. Iwelcome everyone of any race or religion to our Isles. I just wish to reserve the right to tell them that when they plot carnage, they are no longer welcome, whoever they are. i also wish for a day when the home grown elements fear the law, without the support of an army of apologists behind them.
Then we may be free(er) of the fear that grips us, when we fly, catch the tube, walk in the dark, go to a pub or park our car in a multi storey.
Alan

It is unlikely that I would murder your wife. It is far more likely I would commiserate with her!

8-)

Hewitterlan6
Much of what you say is true, -did you see the brief interview with an American terrorism expert on "Newsnight" just after the Airport closures?
He reminded us that since 1980 no terrorism outrage has been claimed to be for Religious purposes, invariably it is because attacts are being taken to the door of an agressor - some group that has 'inveded' land that they consider to be "theirs"
....I'm not sure of the facts he claims but it fits in with much we understand of the middle east and now in UK/USA...even though I believe "we" went into the middle east with the best intentions....it just happened that Saddam Hussain did controll a lot of oil....but he had been a tyrant against his own people for years.

I think the UK's "problem" is largely one of our own making - immigation is seen in terms of people "like us" and that's why we cosset the wrongdoers with excuses such as they have a British Passport - well, so have I and I can't say it holds much pleasure that my Government is operating a hate campain against the young and the elderly. If people that wqnt to visit the UK (permanently, or not) had to agree to maintain our Laws and honour the Queen as head of State, then I can't see why they shouldn't stay here and contribute to the British Nation. However, we have plenty of rougues and manipulators of the truth here already, witness a few MP's Company Directors, Accountanats and Estate Agents (to name but a few that have that Public perception..). If we can't jail company directors that falsify figures, debts, borrowings, loans and a handful of other scams that have (or will) come to light, then it really is time our Consitiution was put on paper (like the American Declaration, as a "foundation" accepted in the US for years).
John Reid has said that discussing Imigration must not be called racist - there is a real problem brewing with criminals (already here)/- comming from countries that don't have our history and whose citizens see the UK as a land of milk and honey - ripe for plunder. These 'outcasts' must never be allowed in.
If they come here to study, to help, to add to our prosperity technically or artistically - that's no problem...provided they behave "....better than the English(!)..."
For all J.Reid's faults (and maybe Opportunistic tendencies-oops!), he appears for now to be speaking some sense and maybe we should have these debates, but don't let's be suckered into believing that ID cards will do the job - the recent troubles and 7/7, 9/11 would not have been prevented by ID cards - Passports are far more difficult to forge and yet these people manages to go undetected for so long.

I agree with every word Alan-suspect that Heather can more than hold her own! She's not had much to say lately though.

Shes fallen out with me, MP.
I refused to take her to a Seikh wedding we were invited to in Coventry, because I had an important cricket match and she has not forgiven me yet!!
It may be some time before I am allowed back in the house, never mind the marital bed!!
We did win though so it was probably worth it.
alan

Can we send a few speech therapists to birmingham, I know its not true but the brummie accent makes them sound ........well........a little thick.
sorry but thats how it sounds.

It is easy to sit in our offices and critisise the policies and involvement in iraq. There was no choice, we had to go into Iraq and remove the WMD (Saddam), most of the current insurgents that are causing the trouble are NOT Iraqi people. These extremeists are comming from other countries in the name of whatever religion they like. The bias reporters fuel the situation by thier slant on events.
The only simple solution is for the real iraqi people to reclaim thier country, and take control over it. This is happening slowly, but due to lack of education within the poorer commuities it will be a slow precess.
These people have nver had a say and to suddenly give them the freedom is a shock. There are so many factions that getting them all to agree on what day it is difficult enough.

A united single state of Iraq is untenable, a futile objective. Ironically, this is the reverse of Vietnam and of course proves that the US/Britain has learnt precisely nothing.

And yet you were quite happy to have a united, single state of Iraq under Saddam? A man who gasses entire villages if they disagree with him?

A cheap shot and untrue - but consistent with the level of debate.