Should Bush and Blair be tried for war crimes?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Miles you tease.


YES!!

[Memphis]

NO

[BIG H]

I see another lighthearted thread in our midst

[Memphis]

Init.

H I think we owe it to the forum to keep this threads feet on the ground before it gets over run with political ranting and quoting of 15 year old UN legislation.

Who do you think would win in a fight, Bush or Blair?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Init.

H I think we owe it to the forum to keep this threads feet on the ground before it gets over run with political ranting and quoting of 15 year old UN legislation.

Who do you think would win in a fight, Bush or Blair?

Bush would get Jeb to stand in his place.

[BIG H]

Init.

H I think we owe it to the forum to keep this threads feet on the ground before it gets over run with political ranting and quoting of 15 year old UN legislation.

Who do you think would win in a fight, Bush or Blair?

Hahaha

[Memphis]

Why was it illegal again?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Why was it illegal again?

Damn you memphis!

Not exactly what you're asking but I'll get the ball rolling.

Blair, Hoon And Straw To Be Investigated For War Crimes!

PRESS RELEASE 23 January 2003
If, as appears likely, the UK is involved in the use of force against Iraq the leaders of the UK Government will be investigated by the prosecutor of the international Criminal Court (ICC) if it breaches international humanitarian law (IHL). So promise a coalition of professors of law and leading NGOs from around the world.1 The UK,US and Canadian Governments have today been served with letters before action warning them of the consequences of an illegal use of force against Iraq. In the UK, Tony Blair was served at 10 Downing Street during filming for a Channel 4 TV programme on January 31.2
The ICC came into being in July 2002 and is shortly to commence work. It will investigate and prosecute those guilty of "genocide," "crimes against humanity" and "war crimes." The definition of "war crimes" is wide and would catch indiscriminate methods of attack or weapon systems used by the UK and US in the 1991 Gulf War, and in Kosovo and Afghanistan.3 Whereas those wars took place before July 2002 any war in Iraq could be subject to the ICC’s jurisdiction. Thus the following which have been used in the past and are in breach of IHL are now prohibited:

• Indiscriminate methods of attack against civilian centres such as high level airs strikes and attacks on cities such as Baghdad and Basra.
• Indiscriminate weapons systems such as cluster bombs, fuel-air explosives, multiple rocket launcher systems or weapons using depleted uranium.
• Attacks on Iraqi infrastructure
• Attacks on electricity supplies (so as to cause the death of thousands of innocent civilians because of failed water sanitation plants).
• Attacks on projects likely to release dangerous forces such as civil nuclear energy plants or dams.

The coalition of lawyers and NGOs plan unprecedented action using the ICC legislation as a threat to force the UK to target its use of force and to avoid indiscriminate attacks. If there are violations of IHL (which prohibits indiscriminate attacks) these and other NGOs who will be in Iraq or otherwise in a position to monitor the war will report to a Tribunal of eminent international jurists and others. If the tribunal finds there have been violations it will report to the prosecutor of the ICC and he will be urged to start an investigation of his own initiative as he is empowered to do.4 Thereafter the coalition will work with the Prosecutor to ensure that the evidence of violations is credible the leaders of the UK Government who, under the principle of Command Responsibility, are liable for violations are prosecuted in the Hague.
Carol Naughton, Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament said today: "The world has changed for the better since the 1991 Gulf War and we now have the International Criminal Court. We can guarantee Messrs. Blair, Hoon and Straw that they will be investigated and prosecuted if they repeat the attacks of that war, or in Kosovo and Afghanistan."
Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, the coalition’s UK lawyer said today: " The definition of war crimes is very broad and will catch indiscriminate methods of attack or weapon systems. The UK Government must ensure that all force used is targeted, discriminate, proportionate and necessary, otherwise its leaders face a similar fate to that of Milosovic."
Michael Mandel of Lawyers Against the War (Canada) and Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School, Toronto said today: " Our governments are planning to commit nothing short of mass murder. They are planning to kill Iraqi civilians without any lawful justification or excuse. That’s a crime in England and in Canada and under international law. No one is above the law, not even Prime Ministers. If they do this terrible thing, we are going to see to it they are personally brought to justice. We are going to prosecute each and every one of them for each and every crime they commit."

[Howlin Mad Missy]

where are bilbo and hatton?

[Gandalf]

Miles you tease.


YES!!

I couldn't resist...

I know it isn't good form to post links to Daily Mail articles, but this one has a charming image of Blair covered in blood.

Iraq was only fourth on WMD risk list, inquiry hears | Mail Online

There seems to be a fair bit in the media about it all, so it's my new topic of interest. Rather than having an inquiry that has no teeth, I would much rather these two were investigated properly, and if found guilty, put under lock and key for the rest of their lives. They have wreaked unbelievable levels of havoc and destruction in the lands they decided to illegally occupy. Rather than halt terrorism these two clowns have raised anti U.S/British sentiment throughout the world and have probably increased the likelihood of future terrorist attacks. You don't wipe out over a million people around the world and expect nothing in return at some stage along the way.

By putting these two on trial we can show the world that the West isn't quite so bad, and that we can admit that we made a terrible mistake, and hopefully to make future leaders think twice about ever doing something like this again.

[Gandalf]

I think George Bush beats Tony Blair if they were to lace up gloves. He obviously has good upper body movement having avoided that shoe. Tony Blair would have been in serious trouble with that one.

Bush by mid rounds stoppage.