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?

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.

Marc

The only simple solution is for the real Iraqi people to reclaim their country, and take control over it. This is happening slowly, but due to lack of education within the poorer communities it will be a slow process.

This would have applied if we had not interfered in Iraq with less deaths and mutilation than is ongoing at present.


We did not learn from Northern Ireland that if the "terrorists" / "freedom Fighters" have community support they can merge into it and disappear. When this occurs
they can re-emerge at will and continue. To remove that support you have to remove or at least address the abuses which the communities (groups) feel they are suffering.

That eventually means talking rather than attempting to kill.
H6
As far as the gassing is concerned, this was with the connivance of the United States who provided the weapons and gas. America I think with their invasion and WMD probably killed and maimed many more "Iraqis! than Saddam kill of Kurds.

I think Israel wonton indiscriminate bombing of civilians is a reflection back to what the Nazis were doing in their management of the occupied countries during WW2.

I put Blair and Bush in the same category as Saddam and think that the former two should be tried for crimes against humanity.

I would not have been against the removal of Saddam if it had been done under the auspices of the United Nations. The UN while it has many weaknesses and needs changes to its constitution is the best chances of a peaceful and more egalitarian world.

A single state is not untenable, just very difficult and will be a slow process.
Winning the hearts and minds of the public is the only way forward. It worked in Northern Ireland and it will work there. The people must decide what they want and must unite to get it.
United they can, by thier support of thier own police, close down the insurgents, hiding places.
Remember its hard to move or kill a terrorist if you dont know who they are.
I agree the U.S should not be running the show over thier. They have no concept of tact and diplomacy, unless thier using a bomb to get it. The Americans have always been very slow to learn from thier mistakes. If they dont learn quickly they and all the coalition forces could get a serious kick up trhe backside.

They are already getting that kick up the bum Marc,its about time we and the yanks stop being the police force for the world bring them all home ASAP.

Not a cheap shot at all!!
You argued with commitment and no small level of eloquance that Iraq should never have been invaded, and Saddamshould not have been replaced in this way. You actually made some very good debating points in support of your argument, and now you say something that at face value appears inconsistent. Why would that be a cheap point?
I point it out, as a way of reinforcing my own view that the criticism levelled at those who supported the war is made without reference to the alternative, which is for Saddam to remain in power.
Alan

But the removal was done under the auspices of the UN. It was their resolution that called for his removal if he did not comply immediately and completely, without the need for a further vote.
He did not comply and he was removed. His non complicity was never doubted by anyone, least of all Kofi Annan.
As far as gassing was with the connivance of the US, that is no more than apologising for Saddam. If I give you a breadknife I am hardly responsible for you running it through someones ribs!! the gassing of the kurds has never, to my knowledge been disputed or blamed on anyone else.
The indiscriminate killing of civilians is exactly what our anti-terror police are stopping, and that is not done by UK and US forces.
You reiterate your stance on negotiation,addressing the issues, but that is a recipe for disaster. Give in once and you are lost. We will very soon have every single minority in our land demanding more and more and threatening to blow people up if they do not acceed. Where will that end?