Should Bush and Blair be tried for war crimes?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

why shouldn't Iraq have nuclear capabilities?

Well at that point in time Missy one Saddam Hussein was in power and Saddam had conducted terrorist activities (so Gore says in that video) and had used POISON GAS on Kurds.....so I think it was just a good idea to keep WMD's away from him and most world leaders agreed.

Nothing wrong with Nuclear POWER but not everyone should have nuclear weapons and usually world leaders use Nuclear Power as the guise to achieve nuclear weapons

1988, gas attack - the West DID NOTHING.

1990 1st Gulf War because he invaded Kuwait.

It wasn't until 2003 the west gained a conscience and used the death of the Kurds as one of the many smoke screens for invading Iraq.

[El Kabong]

This is the paradox for the US, do nothing in 1988 and get bitched at invade the country and take down their dictator in 2003 and get bitched at....we're CONSTANTLY in a no win situation it's either "Mind your own business!" or "Aren't you going to help?" and with every situation there are at least 2 sides and usually they'll say both of those things.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

no Lyle. All of the West stood by and let Saddam do it but what people wont excuse is waiting 15 then use it as a justification for a phoney war.

That's the problem.

[Kirkland Laing]

This is the paradox for the US, do nothing in 1988 and get bitched at invade the country and take down their dictator in 2003 and get bitched at....we're CONSTANTLY in a no win situation it's either "Mind your own business!" or "Aren't you going to help?" and with every situation there are at least 2 sides and usually they'll say both of those things.

But you weren't minding your own business, you were actively backing Saddam because he was at war with Iran, a country whose regime you were trying to overthrow because they'd overthrown the previous Iranian dictatorial regime that you'd installed in power. And Reagan actually got the DIA to make a report blaming the gassing of the kUrds on Iran so that the US could still continue to support Saddam without getting criticised/sanctioned for it. You were minding your own business in the Middle East in the 1980s in the same way that Adolf Hitler was minding his own business in central Europe in the 1930s.

[Nameless]

This is the paradox for the US, do nothing in 1988 and get bitched at invade the country and take down their dictator in 2003 and get bitched at....we're CONSTANTLY in a no win situation it's either "Mind your own business!" or "Aren't you going to help?" and with every situation there are at least 2 sides and usually they'll say both of those things.

Never lost in sight that Rumsfeld and Saddam were buddy buddy at the time and that the US sold tons of weapons to IRaq knowing what they would do with it... chemical stuff too. England even sold a gaz factory to Iraq, keys in hands.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUPb-3zkh0c

[El Kabong]

OK first off let me say I was wrong.....I should have put LBJ instead of JFK in my previous post re: Vietnam being an illegally started war, man that has been bothering me all day

Kirkland/Nameless those are erroneous points if we're talking about JUST George Bush and not American foreign policy as a whole which I assume this thread will eventually get into but either way the US isn't the bad guys and W and Blair are not war criminals and once again to suggest such a thing is idiotic, partisian, and doesn't help anyone except the terrorists....right now the terrorists are thinking "We think they are wrong because they do not follow Muhammed and they are occupying our countries" and if we even tried W and Blair for war crimes it would be "Even they knew they were wrong, let's kill them anyway"

The issue I have with liberals these days is that under NO MEANS is war ever acceptable and that is not only foolish and naive but it's dangerous because just 8 years ago we were at peace and we got blindsided by a group who was/is/and will always be at war with us and to not even attempt to fight back is mental.

[Kirkland Laing]

the US isn't the bad guys and W and Blair are not war criminals and once again to suggest such a thing is idiotic, partisian, and doesn't help anyone except the terrorists....right now the terrorists are thinking "We think they are wrong because they do not follow Muhammed and they are occupying our countries" and if we even tried W and Blair for war crimes it would be "Even they knew they were wrong, let's kill them anyway"

The issue I have with liberals these days is that under NO MEANS is war ever acceptable and that is not only foolish and naive but it's dangerous because just 8 years ago we were at peace and we got blindsided by a group who was/is/and will always be at war with us and to not even attempt to fight back is mental.

The US started an illegal premptive war against a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? How are they not the bad guys?

Bush and Blair planned an aggressive preemtive war and there's endless evidence to show this. Back in 1948 planning aggressive wars was described by the head American prosecutor at Nuremburg as the worst of all war crimes, the kingpin that allowed all the other Nazi war crimes to happen. Bearing this in mind, shouldn't B and B be prosecuted for planning a war of aggression?

In 2001 you got attacked by people from countries where for decades you've been propping up tyrants, despots and dictators who've kept their people under horrible repressive conditions. Don't you think that after decades of keeping these guys in power, continuing to keep those guys in power and thus dooming hundreds of millions of people to live under endless repression, that it's understandable if some of those people might occasionally take their anger about it out on your office buildings?

[Nameless]

the US isn't the bad guys and W and Blair are not war criminals and once again to suggest such a thing is idiotic, partisian, and doesn't help anyone except the terrorists....right now the terrorists are thinking "We think they are wrong because they do not follow Muhammed and they are occupying our countries" and if we even tried W and Blair for war crimes it would be "Even they knew they were wrong, let's kill them anyway"

The issue I have with liberals these days is that under NO MEANS is war ever acceptable and that is not only foolish and naive but it's dangerous because just 8 years ago we were at peace and we got blindsided by a group who was/is/and will always be at war with us and to not even attempt to fight back is mental.

The US started an illegal premptive war against a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? How are they not the bad guys?

Bush and Blair planned an aggressive preemtive war and there's endless evidence to show this. Back in 1948 planning aggressive wars was described by the head American prosecutor at Nuremburg as the worst of all war crimes, the kingpin that allowed all the other Nazi war crimes to happen. Bearing this in mind, shouldn't B and B be prosecuted for planning a war of aggression?

In 2001 you got attacked by people from countries where for decades you've been propping up tyrants, despots and dictators who've kept their people under horrible repressive conditions. Don't you think that after decades of keeping these guys in power, continuing to keep those guys in power and thus dooming hundreds of millions of people to live under endless repression, that it's understandable if some of those people might occasionally take their anger about it out on your office buildings?

That sums up pretty much my thoughts. Plus Lyle, know that such behaviors are just fueling the extremists ranks, it gives them gold arguments to recruit: "you see, America declare an illegal war on us because they hate muslims and want our demise" and such bullshit. The war made things worst toward extremists. Fact.

[El Kabong]

The US started an illegal premptive war against a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? How are they not the bad guys?

Bush and Blair planned an aggressive preemtive war and there's endless evidence to show this. Back in 1948 planning aggressive wars was described by the head American prosecutor at Nuremburg as the worst of all war crimes, the kingpin that allowed all the other Nazi war crimes to happen. Bearing this in mind, shouldn't B and B be prosecuted for planning a war of aggression?

In 2001 you got attacked by people from countries where for decades you've been propping up tyrants, despots and dictators who've kept their people under horrible repressive conditions. Don't you think that after decades of keeping these guys in power, continuing to keep those guys in power and thus dooming hundreds of millions of people to live under endless repression, that it's understandable if some of those people might occasionally take their anger about it out on your office buildings?

The US started illegal preemtive wars with Vietnam and Spain but nothing happened to those leaders.

We propped up Saddam we had every right to take him out

[Howlin Mad Missy]

The US started an illegal premptive war against a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? How are they not the bad guys?

Bush and Blair planned an aggressive preemtive war and there's endless evidence to show this. Back in 1948 planning aggressive wars was described by the head American prosecutor at Nuremburg as the worst of all war crimes, the kingpin that allowed all the other Nazi war crimes to happen. Bearing this in mind, shouldn't B and B be prosecuted for planning a war of aggression?

In 2001 you got attacked by people from countries where for decades you've been propping up tyrants, despots and dictators who've kept their people under horrible repressive conditions. Don't you think that after decades of keeping these guys in power, continuing to keep those guys in power and thus dooming hundreds of millions of people to live under endless repression, that it's understandable if some of those people might occasionally take their anger about it out on your office buildings?

The US started illegal preemtive wars with Vietnam and Spain but nothing happened to those leaders.

We propped up Saddam we had every right to take him out

Lyle, that's just stupid to a new level of stupid.

[Kirkland Laing]

We propped up Saddam we had every right to take him out

Not according to international law you didn't. So bearing that in mind, should B and B face trial for war crimes?