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?

Mark, Maybe this one will be of some help then. http://www.armyjobs.mod.uk/ but having served for 14 years you probably already know about that one.

Fred's suggestion is probably your best bet In that case, If you feel so strongly that way.

Posting on financial BBs won't reach to many people I would have thought.

Marc, it's the lying .... there was no need for it.
If from the outset the Gov't had said were going to iraq to kick butt , coz saddams a complete **** to his people. i would have quiter happily waved the flag. etc.
But they tried WMD's and then the yanks tried to link saddam to AL-QUEDA???? (and are still doing so) .... it's lies, lies , lies.
But hey they're politicians--say what did I really expect.

anyway the damage has been done, I hope they get more that a puppet regime set up, before we move onto wherever.

the thing that really upsets me is , Blair comes accross in europe
(where i do most of my work) as BUSH's lapdog. thats a really sad state of affairs for this country.

Never said it was good, tweenie ;-)
Most sensible answer in over 900 posts!!!

NIce to have a sitting army of upwards of 150k fighting men, and untold military hardware sitting right in the heart of the middle east.......

And the locals fighting amongst themselves......Any excuse to achieve the objective, WMD saddam you pick;-)

I agree the lying was stupid and a typical examle of this government. Honesty is the best policy was never a politician thing requardless of what party.
They seems to take the population for idiots.
We must be - they are still in power.
We are now in a situation where all those troops are being wasted. Why? because as part of our NATO commitment we ( as a country) agreed to 150,000 troops in the area. The majority are support and supply ( pen pushers) so the few fighting troops that are in theatre are over stretched and unable to do the job properly. As far as the government is concerned it had met its obligations.

Yes Blaire is a US lapdog. No question about it. The last British PM to stand up and make a decision was Maggie. Not a popular leader but at least she had the gumtion to stand up and make a decision.

Where do we go from here? - We have created a situation in Iraq, right or wrong, it has happend. Our role now should be to control it build the infrastructure to stabalize the country and then leave. If the people was to revert to what was before then that is thier choice.

And the british tax payer foots the bill, while Hospitals are going bust and the sick have to pay for personal care.

Mentioning Money, whiat is Blair's pension after his success story?

Peanuts! For putting up with all the monkeys!

How do you know that the Government/Tony Blair lied?

They appear (so far) to have been wrong about Iraq's WMD, but that doesn't mean they lied. It is entirely possible that they believed their own flawed intelligence.

Meanwhile, the British taxpayer is footing the bill for far more expensive and out-of-control cockups than Iraq. I refer, of course, to the NHS.

MM. It is still a lie whether it is intentional or not, if the facts are false and said to be correct. Personally, I believed Blair knew that what he portrayed as fact was false or that he is more naive than I think.

Listening to Paddy Ashdown this am. gave for me a refreshing view of the analysis of the "war on terrorism" and approaches wish don't rely on mass killing.

The National Health appals me with the amount of money which has been wasted on it.

Centralising into larger units as proposed will make it worse.

The problem is management by "experts" and politicians, who have little or no "ground floor" experience of what they are managing. Sometimes having limited knowledge of the necessities of a functional service.

Bringing in or trying to integrate the private services into the health service as has been done, and some still wish too, has added to the dissatisfaction and rot in the service.

They are in turn easy to be misled by the professionals of whom many would rejoice in the demise of the NHS for their own advantage.

The problems of the NHS are endemic to our society. Almost all businesses of any size or stature are run by accountants. There appears to be a glass ceiling for operational or technical managers that prevents them from reaching the top.
Check most director lists and what you find is accountants and business studies graduates with very little input from those with experience at the sharp end to add a little reality now and then. The NHS, Police, Fire, Army etc. etc. is no place for balance sheet management. They require proper operational management, and balls to the "stakeholders" and their bean counting.
Just my opinion, but something I feel strongly about (not being an accountant or a business studies graduate ;-) )
Alan

The only eveidence that the goverment lied was thier major statement about the exsistance of WMD's ( i take for granted that Saddam was a WMD himself.) and the links to terror groups. There is no doubt that saddam did and was the sponsor of terror groups. The goverment exaggerated the facts to gain support in the house.
The tax payer does foot the bill but not at the exspence of the NHS. This black hole and total waste of cash is another subject all together. The cash is from the huge pot the government saved by axing large parts of the armed forces. Another fine example of false economy. The british armed forces are now so undermanned that troops move from one war zone to another with little chance of rest. The results are tired, pressurised soldiers with few resources being hounded by the press, who as always are desperate for a bad news story.

Saddam a wmd, yea, armed by the west!!!! agree about under resourced and stressed soldiers.

Saddam a WMD - why because he killed thousands of people, complete villages - why? because he could. There was no one to stop him, or was there?

and of course now hes gone the murdering so and so all the killing has stopped!, its a much better place to live now isnt it, the iraqis' must be overjoyed.

I take your only knowledge of what going on is from the the bias reports from TV. It will take time, the killing still going on including the attacks on troops is being done by extremists from outside iraq, who dislike the idea of a democray in thier part of the world.
The Iraqi people themselves will realize that they can control thier own country, and will kick the insurgents out themselves. Building a country cannot be done overnight, once the infrastucture is in place and the people begin to see the benifits, they will take ownership of there own contry and destiny.
The killing will stop -

The extremists of one period are often the heroes of another. Other nations which have smaller forces than Britain and are prepared to mind their own business, but still prepared to defend their own borders. Having satellites state or equivalents in outlandish states ie. Falklands, Gibraltar as examples does little for Britain in the long run.

Gun boat diplomacy and mind set is becoming more and more a feature of the the past. If there was a national force prepared for "disaster" scenarios and international aid deliverance it would be more worthwhile and long term rewarding for Britain.

This does not reduce my wish for a United Nations Armed Police or Response force
capable of responding to situation similar to Dar fur and even Iraq, Afghanistan I think it is different where America supplied in the past much of the armaments and know how to the Taliban. These are now being used against "west".

I take it your from bury your head in the sand and the ignore the world camp.

The fact that the US provided the weapons in the first place, incidently so did we, surelt makes it all the more important that correct that.

If we have a UN police force, how do u restrict there use. Do we have another bosnia, where troops are forced to watch on as women and children die because they have a mandate which says they cannot interfere?
There is a fine line but it has to be drawn.

the killing in iraq is not just from the outside. saddams clan were a minority clan/race/religion and ruled by fear and are fighting hard to protect their corner (rightly or wrongly). The majority are fighting back. No, i do more than just watch the tele. Did everyone know one of bushes best friends (dick cheney) company has built a pipe line across Afghanistan??

3254, I sugest you re-read my previous submission and the think about its content, rather than respond with knee jerk type reactions, which you seem to wish and the present administration of America and Britain seem to enact.