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 and H6, I wonder how much projection is contained in your postings.

Just wondering.

When we read the varoud journals and watch the television, it seems that we believe what suits our positions or purposes.

Thats the point, fred. you have quoted many sources with the unshakable belief that they are 100% honest with no hidden agenda. there is no such person.
Any war is distasteful, but that does not make it wrong!! In this instance it made it the lesser of 2 evils. The arguments agianst it ring to me of killing the good in the search for the perfect. the perfect does not exist.
You have chosen to side with the anti war side. That is your choice and i respect that. You will find a million and one articles to justify it. I have chosen that I believe the pro war side. I can find a million and one articles to support that. we can each find articles to rubbish the other. I can show you journalists and UN officials prosecuted and sacked for lying and you can do the same with our political leaders.
this means nothing. I can find a million and one articles to say that a large % of the human race is of alien origin, but that does not make it true.
In the end, a majority, not just of this country, but of the world, voted for the action that was taken. if you believe in democracy then you must support the democratic view, regardless of whether you agree with it. that is the nature of a democracy. The real question now is how we deal with the aftermath. indeed, your header question could be replaced with one asking if those who support the Iraqi insurgance and the terrorist activities should be charged with treason.
Alan

Alan.
I take your point.
would add this, used flawed intelligence (no wmd's-no terrorist training camps)- Why not SYRIA- known to have both , why not N KOREA? WHY NOT IRAN?
has only made situation worse.
As a westerner I now feel we (uk) have isolated ourselves further from reality due to our continued brown noseing of USA.
The largest sponsor or world terrorism over past 50 years has been the USA.
Or have we forgotten about El- salvador/nicuagua/cuba/afganistan for god sakes they even allowed funds and arms to the IRA. Or is this excusable on the grounds that USA is/was spreading democracy. LOL

As for bawoani- you sir are a sick puppy. FOAD.

peace

"Democracy is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong."
(cannot remember the source)

Otherwise ...

"Justice without force is impotent, force without justice is tyranny" - Pascal

Which leads to ...

"Democracy passes into despotism." - Plato

First one. if a democracy chooses to do something, then it is the will of the majority. Who gives the minority the right to take a moral judgement. Perhaps their morals are flawed.
Otherwise........
Threats without backing them with force leads to impotancy against those dmaging their neighbours - Alan
Which leads to....
Weak democracy allows despotism -(That Alan bloke again) ;-)
Alan

alan,
your line...

Alan.
I take your point.
would add this, used flawed intelligence (no wmd's-no terrorist training camps)- Why not SYRIA- known to have both , why not N KOREA? WHY NOT IRAN?

the same lines used before the iraq invasion. dont get me wrong the invasion was one of the few good things done by blair and his spineless cronies. Lets be under no illusion it was done to mask the inadequacies of the current government. Saddam was the biggest WMD and was removed. It does not take the brains of a genius to work out, if you had WMD factories (mobile like he had) and six months to hide them you could.
I find it hard to believe people are still moaning about an illegal war. It's happened. The priority should now be allowing the people of iraq to run thier own country.
Part of that is the distruction of terrorism where ever and who ever it is.

hewittalan6 :-))

I prefer to think it is the "choice" of the majority under the influence of
information withheld, temptations of greed and stirred up hysteria of fear.
If "let the voters be fully aware" is a cornerstone of democracy, then there are not many democracies, if any, in the world.

IMO, everyone is entitled to, and should, made their own moral judgement.

War is the new peace.
it will be interesting to see which way US and UK foreign policy goes after the next round of elections.
The origonal question was should bush/blair face war crimes?
who really cares , anymore.

I believe in a democracy and the right of the minority to try to alter the course of events, especially when the leaders of the majority have usurped the leadership for their own causes or have been corrupted by power. This appears to have happened with Blair and I think Bush was corrupt and his henchmen were corrupt before the gained power.


Marc, it is a pity about my backing into your car the other causing you about 2000 of damage. But it happens and it was yesterday. You just have to get on with things. You know , no bleating!!!

Fred, the minority tried and failed because the case was so compelling.

Don't have the stats at hand but which UK government ever had more than 50% of the eligible votes?

"The servant become the master by pretending to serve."

Semantics. Every party that ever promised to change the voting system lost by a landslide. nobody wants the horsetrading governments created by PR.

Irans the next big one in about 4 months time those reactors will be bombed by the United Stats of Israel.

USA will not invade IRAN or bomb it for fear of giving largest standing army in middle east free reign to cause chaos.
So much for a war on terror.

The leader of iran is certifiably mad , but you've got to admire his balls.
" come'an ave a go if you think your 'ard enuf "
LOL

Last man to say that lost two sons and got a right kicking, believe Saddam was his name.......:-))

America, Who ?


They lost in vietnam.

They lost in Iraq.

They are lost in Afghanistan.

Who would back them?


I forgot H6 and Mitzy.

Largest standing army in mideast lol, jeez Canada could whip those bunch of ragtags never mind the mighty USA>.......

Olympic standard conclusion jumping there, fred. had you ever bothered to read my early posts on this thread, or any other thread, you would know that I blame USA - via disney & Macdonalds - for almost all the worlds ills.
No good trying to discuss with someone who reads things that are not there, and misses things that are.
However I would back any country that I thought was doing anything to rid the world of evil men like Saddam long before backing half wits who moan about things and do not have the courage to do anything about it.
Personally I would line up against Iran, Zimbabwe and Korea to name but a few, and the free world would win, if only it was not for the handwringing liberals making the suicide bombers and despots believe they were starting to get somewhere.
United we stand, divided the world is run by a bunch of mad mullahs and tribalistic idiots, with the odd dictator thrown in.
I too can jump to conclusions and your posts suggest that is what you would like. Good luck with it Fred, cos you would certainly need it.

H6, Would you be at the front?

Or would you be pushing from the rear in dealing with IRan and North Korea?

September 1, 2006 No.1276

Egyptian Weekly on Hizbullah's Armed Children's Militias

In its August 18, 2006 edition, the Egyptian weekly Roz Al-Yusuf featured an investigative article by Mirfat Al-Hakim titled "Hizbullah's Children's Militias." The article reveals that Hizbullah has recruited over 2,000 children aged 10-15 to serve in armed militias, and that the Hizbullah-affiliated Mahdi Scouts youth organization is training them to become martyrs. [1]

The following are excerpts from the article:

Hizbullah Recruits Children Barely 10 Years Old
According to Roz Al-Yusuf, "Hizbullah has recruited over 2,000 innocent children aged 10-15 to form armed militias. Before the recent war with Israel, these children appeared only in the annual Jerusalem Day celebrations, and were referred to as the 'December 14 Units,' but today they are called istishhadiyun ['martyrs']..."

"Hizbullah has customarily recruited youths and children and trained them to fight from a very early age. These are children barely 10 years old, who wear camouflage uniforms, cover their faces with black [camouflage] paint, swear to wage jihad, and join the Mahdi Scouts [youth organization]...

"The children are selected by Hizbullah recruitment [officers] based on one criterion only: They must be willing to become martyrs."