but those leaders arnt posing a threat to world peace... and arnt sitting upon massive oil reserves!

 

but what would your answer be to the saddam problem?...

 

I still maintain that even if Saddam Hussein had been fully compliant with the UN weapons inspectors that Bush and Blair would have gone in anyways as Bush and Blair started blaming Hussein for 9/11 so they would have gone in under the pretext of 9/11 even if Hussein had complied with UN inspectors

 

A life of a person in a country that has no oil is as valuable as the life of a person in a country with oil

God well we may as well hang Tony Blair and Bush then

God well we may as well hang Tony Blair and Bush then

 

I love that idea :cheer: :cheer: :cheer: I would happily press the lever to the trapdoor myself

I still maintain that even if Saddam Hussein had been fully compliant with the UN weapons inspectors that Bush and Blair would have gone in anyways as Bush and Blair started blaming Hussein for 9/11 so they would have gone in under the pretext of 9/11 even if Hussein had complied with UN inspectors

 

A life of a person in a country that has no oil is as valuable as the life of a person in a country with oil

 

 

i dont think so... well america might have, but blairs decision to go in was touch and go anyway... and tbh im not that fussed if the yanks went in alone, they had more reason to maybe?.. but with full compliance blair wouldnt have gone in... and survived the next election anyway.

 

 

A life of a person in a country that has no oil is as valuable as the life of a person in a country with oil

 

 

yes!... apparently .... :wacko:

I still maintain that even if Saddam Hussein had been fully compliant with the UN weapons inspectors that Bush and Blair would have gone in anyways as Bush and Blair started blaming Hussein for 9/11 so they would have gone in under the pretext of 9/11 even if Hussein had complied with UN inspectors

 

A life of a person in a country that has no oil is as valuable as the life of a person in a country with oil

 

Absolutely mate, totally agree.. The Bush Admin and the New World Order/Project For A New American Century was determined to invade Iraq no matter what, 9/11 and WMDs were just a convienient excuse, the invasion plans were drawn up by the NWO and the likes of Haliburton (which the likes of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, etc have interests in...) during the Clinton Adminstration... Over $200 billion dollars has been funnelled off from the oil wealth of Iraq in the past three years. Three guesses where it's gone... As for ordinary Iraqis, Americans and Brits, we continue to pay the cost of the war, both in financial and blood terms... <_<

but those leaders arnt posing a threat to world peace...

 

Erm, have you seen what's been going on in North Korea lately....?? I'd say that regime poses a much more significant threat to supposed "World Peace" (in reality there is no such thing... And it's funny how the definition the West has of "World Peace" seems to involve "doing exactly what America says or else...") than Saddam or Iran....

 

And then there's the small matter of Vladimir Putin, who has his political opponents assassinated, tries to influence the politics of other countries in the region (the most obvious example being Ukraine where his minions almost certainly had a hand in the attempted murder of the current President...), and of course the slaughter of over 25,000 Chechens....

 

 

can someone please remind me when Blair and Bush started blaming Hussein for 9/11 :blink:

can someone please remind me when Blair and Bush started blaming Hussein for 9/11 :blink:

 

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00247.htm

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../27/walq327.xml

can someone please remind me when Blair and Bush started blaming Hussein for 9/11 :blink:

 

There were several attempts by the current US Administration to try and link Saddam and Iraqi security forces to the Twin Towers/Al Qaeda... The main one being the "report" presented by Colin Powell. There was also much made of a supposed meeting between an Iraqi Intelligence officer and a middle-ranking member of Al Qaeda a year or so before 9/11 happened...

 

It was the Yanks who made more of it than Blair did, but still, Blair went along with it in the end....

 

Absolutely mate, totally agree.. The Bush Admin and the New World Order/Project For A New American Century was determined to invade Iraq no matter what, 9/11 and WMDs were just a convienient excuse, the invasion plans were drawn up by the NWO and the likes of Haliburton (which the likes of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, etc have interests in...) during the Clinton Adminstration... Over $200 billion dollars has been funnelled off from the oil wealth of Iraq in the past three years. Three guesses where it's gone... As for ordinary Iraqis, Americans and Brits, we continue to pay the cost of the war, both in financial and blood terms... <_<

 

 

its all speculation... you/we dont know and will never KNOW how things would have gone. i dont think for 1 moment that blair would have gone in regardless, though the yanks might. and im not sure even they would have... wmd was the excuses, saddam handed it to them on a plate... the point of this thread was to apportion blame for these deaths to the correct perpetrator, seeing as i have successfully made that point trying to say 'yeah but' 'what if' is pure speculation and you are using it merely to support your anti bush/blair rantings (most of which i agree with) along with the nonsensicle 'blair n bush should also be tried as well'..... ever wondered WHY they havnt been indited ?.... lol.

Erm, have you seen what's been going on in North Korea lately....?? I'd say that regime poses a much more significant threat to supposed "World Peace" (in reality there is no such thing... And it's funny how the definition the West has of "World Peace" seems to involve "doing exactly what America says or else...") than Saddam or Iran....

 

And then there's the small matter of Vladimir Putin, who has his political opponents assassinated, tries to influence the politics of other countries in the region (the most obvious example being Ukraine where his minions almost certainly had a hand in the attempted murder of the current President...), and of course the slaughter of over 25,000 Chechens....

 

 

and eyes are now turning to north korea, from several different directions....

 

'doing what america says'?.... you mean 'stop building wmd as we dont trust you not to set them off'?... well frankly i dont see much wrong with that! should we let unstable countries do wtf they want unchallenged?...

 

putin?... oh come on! yes he rules with an iron fist, but he/they are not a threat to world peace!

its all speculation... you/we dont know and will never KNOW how things would have gone. i dont think for 1 moment that blair would have gone in regardless, though the yanks might. and im not sure even they would have... wmd was the excuses, saddam handed it to them on a plate... the point of this thread was to apportion blame for these deaths to the correct perpetrator, seeing as i have successfully made that point trying to say 'yeah but' 'what if' is pure speculation and you are using it merely to support your anti bush/blair rantings (most of which i agree with) along with the nonsensicle 'blair n bush should also be tried as well'..... ever wondered WHY they havnt been indited ?.... lol.

 

For the same reason "Bomber" Harris wasn't mate, the same reason Julius Caeser, Henry VIII, Pinochet, Putin, Chairman Mao, Stalin, Thatcher, Reagan, Zhang Zemin and a whole raft of others never do - the winners NEVER get put on trial; "History is written by the winners" as someone once said.. We are living in a world of "Pax Americana" - 'peace' through the threat of American weapons of war, the authority of the UN is non-existent (although they dont want to admit it..), so how could they bring Bush or Blair to trial, they'd just be ignored, and it would just create embarrassment to the UN...

 

Why is it 'nonsensical' to put Bush and B-Liar on trial but not for Thatcher, as you have argued for...? You're being a bit inconsistent mate... What Bush and B-Liar did was on a far greater scale than what Thatch did...

and eyes are now turning to north korea, from several different directions....

 

'doing what america says'?.... you mean 'stop building wmd as we dont trust you not to set them off'?... well frankly i dont see much wrong with that! should we let unstable countries do wtf they want unchallenged?...

 

putin?... oh come on! yes he rules with an iron fist, but he/they are not a threat to world peace!

 

Why shouldn't Iran develop Nukes...? They're under a very real threat from the US, they've just seen their neighbour Iraq be invaded because they didn't have them and Israel were illegally (under the non-proliferation treaty) supplied nuclear weapons by the US... If I was Iranian I'd want a Nucler Deterrent....

 

And we trust America not to...? So far they're the only country in the world that HAS... And dont give me any BS about it being 'war' against Japan mate, it holds no water with me, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were of no particular strategic or military importance, if you want to cut off a country's head you target the capital where the seat of power is... America used the atom bomb on the Japanese purely to test it, using Japanese civilians as guinea pigs..

 

So, you dont belive that Putin is a danger...? Well, speak to any Eastern European person then you'd get a totally different perspective on him. The guy's trying to rig elections in other countries and have Political leaders who are hostile to himself assassinated FFS!!! The man's so fukkin' crooked I'm surprised he can stand upright at all...

 

For the same reason "Bomber" Harris wasn't mate, the same reason Julius Caeser, Henry VIII, Pinochet, Putin, Chairman Mao, Stalin, Thatcher, Reagan, Zhang Zemin and a whole raft of others never do - the winners NEVER get put on trial; "History is written by the winners" as someone once said.. We are living in a world of "Pax Americana" - 'peace' through the threat of American weapons of war, the authority of the UN is non-existent (although they dont want to admit it..), so how could they bring Bush or Blair to trial, they'd just be ignored, and it would just create embarrassment to the UN...

 

Why is it 'nonsensical' to put Bush and B-Liar on trial but not for Thatcher, as you have argued for...? You're being a bit inconsistent mate... What Bush and B-Liar did was on a far greater scale than what Thatch did...

 

 

you cant seriously compare historical figures by todays morality.. id like to see several of todays leaders bought to book over their muderous actions. but i dont suppose it will happen.

 

the point about bush/blair still remains... it was saddam that orchestrated the whole affair, thats how it happend, not how it might have happend.

 

i cite thatch only in response to craigs anti blair/bush rantings...

Why shouldn't Iran develop Nukes...? They're under a very real threat from the US, they've just seen their neighbour Iraq be invaded because they didn't have them and Israel were illegally (under the non-proliferation treaty) supplied nuclear weapons by the US... If I was Iranian I'd want a Nucler Deterrent....

 

And we trust America not to...? So far they're the only country in the world that HAS... And dont give me any BS about it being 'war' against Japan mate, it holds no water with me, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were of no particular strategic or military importance, if you want to cut off a country's head you target the capital where the seat of power is... America used the atom bomb on the Japanese purely to test it, using Japanese civilians as guinea pigs..

 

So, you dont belive that Putin is a danger...? Well, speak to any Eastern European person then you'd get a totally different perspective on him. The guy's trying to rig elections in other countries and have Political leaders who are hostile to himself assassinated FFS!!! The man's so fukkin' crooked I'm surprised he can stand upright at all...

 

 

america has had nukes for 60 years and hasnt used them since japan. did that stop anyone picking a scrap with them?... no... america would sooner loose in vietnam then use the bomb. can you be so sure that some tin-pot dictator with the bomb wouldnt use it?.... i sure as hell wouldnt! iran is safe, it doesnt need a deterant, even less then what we did in the cold war and i bet you were against our deterant so now whos dealing with double standards? :P

 

i dont think that putin is a real danger to world peace... though i wouldnt defend his actions at home.

america has had nukes for 60 years and hasnt used them since japan. did that stop anyone picking a scrap with them?... no... america would sooner loose in vietnam then use the bomb. can you be so sure that some tin-pot dictator with the bomb wouldnt use it?.... i sure as hell wouldnt! iran is safe, it doesnt need a deterant, even less then what we did in the cold war and i bet you were against our deterant so now whos dealing with double standards? :P

 

i dont think that putin is a real danger to world peace... though i wouldnt defend his actions at home.

 

Bollocks mate, Iran has every reason to fear American aggression, America has made barely veiled threats against Iran that invasion is a possibility, it has invaded its neighbour. We had no reason to fear Russian invasion at any time really, and we certainly dont have any reason to fear invasion from an aggressive foreign power NOW.. Or maybe I missed the recent invasions of France and Germany...

 

Maybe if Israel gave up itsbomb then Iran's position may become untenable, but until then. And I dont see the US dictating to India or Pakistan what they should do, and frankly I reckon we have MUCH more reason to fear that little spat going nuclear than we EVER had to fear Saddam...

 

America may have stopped short at using Nukes in Vietnam, but Christ, they chucked just about everything else at the Vietnamese, INCLUDING CHEMICAL WEAPONS.... <_< <_< And maybe you missed Nixon's carpet-bombing of Cambodia... Nixon and Johnson - two OTHER American War Criminals who never recieved their just desserts....

 

As for Putin, well, maybe you wont be saying such wonderful things about Vlad 'the impaler' Putin when he starts holding the whole of Europe to ransom over gas and oil supplies in the future, eh mate....?

the point about bush/blair still remains... it was saddam that orchestrated the whole affair, thats how it happend, not how it might have happend.

 

 

Here's a little something that you may have forgotten about.... America compromised the integrity and independence of the UN Weapons Inspections team by installing CIA double agents into the team's number... There were several high ranking members of Scott Ritter's (former Head of the UN Weapons Inspection team..) team that were paid spies for America and were passing on information to the CIA... So much for the 'independence' and 'integrity' of the UN!! And frankly, given that, you cant really blame Saddam for his non-compliance... The Yanks did it once.... You might want to read Scott Ritter's book sometime - it's called "Endgame". Very illuminating...

Here's a little something that you may have forgotten about.... America compromised the integrity and independence of the UN Weapons Inspections team by installing CIA double agents into the team's number... There were several high ranking members of Scott Ritter's (former Head of the UN Weapons Inspection team..) team that were paid spies for America and were passing on information to the CIA... So much for the 'independence' and 'integrity' of the UN!! And frankly, given that, you cant really blame Saddam for his non-compliance... The Yanks did it once.... You might want to read Scott Ritter's book sometime - it's called "Endgame". Very illuminating...

 

 

regardless.... all the bloodshed could have been averted if saddam had complied. he knew what he was doing, but failed to get the islamic backing he wanted.

Bollocks mate, Iran has every reason to fear American aggression, America has made barely veiled threats against Iran that invasion is a possibility, it has invaded its neighbour. We had no reason to fear Russian invasion at any time really, and we certainly dont have any reason to fear invasion from an aggressive foreign power NOW.. Or maybe I missed the recent invasions of France and Germany...

 

Maybe if Israel gave up itsbomb then Iran's position may become untenable, but until then. And I dont see the US dictating to India or Pakistan what they should do, and frankly I reckon we have MUCH more reason to fear that little spat going nuclear than we EVER had to fear Saddam...

 

America may have stopped short at using Nukes in Vietnam, but Christ, they chucked just about everything else at the Vietnamese, INCLUDING CHEMICAL WEAPONS.... <_< <_< And maybe you missed Nixon's carpet-bombing of Cambodia... Nixon and Johnson - two OTHER American War Criminals who never recieved their just desserts....

 

As for Putin, well, maybe you wont be saying such wonderful things about Vlad 'the impaler' Putin when he starts holding the whole of Europe to ransom over gas and oil supplies in the future, eh mate....?

 

 

america would invade iran wether iran had nukes or not, after all, how tf could iran deliver an atomic weapon to america?...

 

israel having nukes hasnt stopped anyone attacking them has it! and israel hasnt used them! bloody waste of time.