Should Bush and Blair be tried for war crimes?

[VictorCharlie]

Maybe so but I just don't understand the attempt to put rules and regulations on armed conflict in some way to humanize it. Personally I think killing one another is a very HUMAN trait and has been throughout history. It seems people don't like seeing how depraved we can be and feel better about it with some semblance of honor in war. Like I said there is no substitute for victory. Why play by a set of rules when your enemy doesn't? Why cling to some moral high ground when it doesn't necessarily aid winning? I don't know why people are ever suprised to look at an armed conflict and find horrible acts. It in and of itself is a horrible act.

Yes, bring back rape and flame throwers. Top man.

Pretty easy to say from the sideline. Lets put your life on the line and the lives of your closest friends and then see how you feel about it. The adversaries in Iraq and Afghanistan violate Geneva EVERY day. Point you judgemental finger else where. And rape? really? Please point out my post advocating rape...oh yeah not going to find one but nice attempt at a smear campaign...but fuck yeah I could have put a flamethrower to good use a couple of times.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Maybe so but I just don't understand the attempt to put rules and regulations on armed conflict in some way to humanize it. Personally I think killing one another is a very HUMAN trait and has been throughout history. It seems people don't like seeing how depraved we can be and feel better about it with some semblance of honor in war. Like I said there is no substitute for victory. Why play by a set of rules when your enemy doesn't? Why cling to some moral high ground when it doesn't necessarily aid winning? I don't know why people are ever suprised to look at an armed conflict and find horrible acts. It in and of itself is a horrible act.

Yes, bring back rape and flame throwers. Top man.

Pretty easy to say from the sideline. Lets put your life on the line and the lives of your closest friends and then see how you feel about it. The adversaries in Iraq and Afghanistan violate Geneva EVERY day. Point you judgemental finger else where. And rape? really? Please point out my post advocating rape...oh yeah not going to find one but nice attempt at a smear campaign...but fuck yeah I could have put a flamethrower to good use a couple of times.

'why play by a set of rules when your opponent doesn't'

You said anything goes, rape is a common 'practice' of war in many countries would you like some information on it?

You think of these people as savage and barbaric which implies you think of yourself as better than them then advocate any means to fight them.

[El Kabong]

Missy why don't you just go ahead and wage jihad already I mean for fucks sake these bastards sneak attack us and you just say "oh well we had it coming let's just ignore that murderous attack on innocent civilians" (I know Kirkland thinks that)

[Nameless]

Missy why don't you just go ahead and wage jihad already I mean for fucks sake these bastards sneak attack us and you just say "oh well we had it coming let's just ignore that murderous attack on innocent civilians" (I know Kirkland thinks that)

Most Muslim are against Jihyad and have the real definition for it (which I could explain, the international colloquium we did organize about it a year and a half ago was quite enlightening). Beside, There is a difference between killing djyhadist, innocent soldiers trying to protect their land from an illegal war and killing 500 000 dollars for a very ill designed embargo which you know is killing peoples.

[Kirkland Laing]

Missy why don't you just go ahead and wage jihad already I mean for fucks sake these bastards sneak attack us and you just say "oh well we had it coming let's just ignore that murderous attack on innocent civilians" (I know Kirkland thinks that)

You don't ignore it but you don't make the situation worse by sending more military into more Muslim countries, particularly countries that had nothing to do with any terrorist attack.

[Gandalf]

Missy why don't you just go ahead and wage jihad already I mean for fucks sake these bastards sneak attack us and you just say "oh well we had it coming let's just ignore that murderous attack on innocent civilians" (I know Kirkland thinks that)

You don't ignore it but you don't make the situation worse by sending more military into more Muslim countries, particularly countries that had nothing to do with any terrorist attack.

Exactly. The US made a stupid mistake in invading both Afghanistan and Iraq imo. They are now in so deep in Afghanistan that they are stuck there indefinitely. Unless they try to make their excuses like in Iraq, which would look very poor. The terrorists were Saudi Arabian and plans were hatched in Germany. Afghanistan and Iraq are appear to be excuses to extend influence in the region. There are obviously only a few terrorists possibly in Afghanistan and none of them have played any role in Iraq. Meanwhile, America has made itself world enemy number 1 in the eyes of many. They have lost all sense of sympathy now.

[brucelee]

Missy why don't you just go ahead and wage jihad already I mean for fucks sake these bastards sneak attack us and you just say "oh well we had it coming let's just ignore that murderous attack on innocent civilians" (I know Kirkland thinks that)

You don't ignore it but you don't make the situation worse by sending more military into more Muslim countries, particularly countries that had nothing to do with any terrorist attack.

Exactly. The US made a stupid mistake in invading both Afghanistan and Iraq imo. They are now in so deep in Afghanistan that they are stuck there indefinitely. Unless they try to make their excuses like in Iraq, which would look very poor. The terrorists were Saudi Arabian and plans were hatched in Germany. Afghanistan and Iraq are appear to be excuses to extend influence in the region. There are obviously only a few terrorists possibly in Afghanistan and none of them have played any role in Iraq. Meanwhile, America has made itself world enemy number 1 in the eyes of many. They have lost all sense of sympathy now.

I do not condone acts of war but it is my belief that America had a justified war against Iraq.

Iraq was celebrating upon the news that the two towers went down. There had been news that Iraq (particularly saddam) had a part in that terrorism.

If you have a family member who had been a victim in that tragedy, you would easily agree with me.

Attacking Iraq was symbolic and it gave a clear signal to the world that America will do whatever it can to stop all these terrorists.

We all know Saddam was financing those terrorists and personally, I believe that Bush and Blair should not be tried for protecting their citizens from terrorists.

I know how hard it is to live with Muslim terrorists. I grew up in a place where bombings is a common occurrence precisely because I grew up near a Muslim community ( thankfully my parents decided to leave that place). NOt to be racist here, I grew up with the thinking that most Muslims are terrorists and I can't take that belief away. Mindanao ( the place where I was born) is still plagued with bombings and massacres.

I thank Bush and Blair for having that guts to fight these Muslim terrorists. The current president of the Philippines is afraid of them that's why they are still thriving in my country.

Currently,if you are not familiar with the news in the Philippines, there were 30 journalists heinously massacred by a warlord/group of warlords in Mindanao. Guess who are those warlords and how their faiths are connected to those terrorists I mentioned!

These terrorists cry foul when they are attacked and I find it funny that they call their wars as "HOLY" when they kill innocent people.

Just thinking out loud.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

I do not condone acts of war but it is my belief that America had a justified war against Iraq.

Iraq was celebrating upon the news that the two towers went down. There had been news that Iraq (particularly saddam) had a part in that terrorism.

rubbish. No evidence at all.
lots of people celebrated. Maybe the US should have invaded every country where extremists were on the tv ranting.

If you have a family member who had been a victim in that tragedy, you would easily agree with me.

Attacking Iraq was symbolic and it gave a clear signal to the world that America will do whatever it can to stop all these terrorists.

1st. Why would I? Not all the relatives of 9/11 did.

2nd. On what grounds was it ok for the US to attack? Because Saddam smiled about it OR he was a convenient scapegoat for the US to flex its muscle?

We all know Saddam was financing those terrorists and personally, I believe that Bush and Blair should not be tried for protecting their citizens from terrorists.

Saddam or the people of Iraq did not fly any planes in to any tower.
The majority were Saudi! There is no way the US was going to invade Saudi!

I know how hard it is to live with Muslim terrorists. I grew up in a place where bombings is a common occurrence precisely because I grew up near a Muslim community ( thankfully my parents decided to leave that place). NOt to be racist here, I grew up with the thinking that most Muslims are terrorists and I can't take that belief away. Mindanao ( the place where I was born) is still plagued with bombings and massacres.

I thank Bush and Blair for having that guts to fight these Muslim terrorists. The current president of the Philippines is afraid of them that's why they are still thriving in my country.

Currently,if you are not familiar with the news in the Philippines, there were 30 journalists heinously massacred by a warlord/group of warlords in Mindanao. Guess who are those warlords and how their faiths are connected to those terrorists I mentioned!

These terrorists cry foul when they are attacked and I find it funny that they call their wars as "HOLY" when they kill innocent people.

Just thinking out loud.

This is what happens when you don't keep a grip on things in your own country. These people didn't spring from nowhere. It should have been dealt with before it got to this stage.

[VictorCharlie]

Yes, bring back rape and flame throwers. Top man.

Pretty easy to say from the sideline. Lets put your life on the line and the lives of your closest friends and then see how you feel about it. The adversaries in Iraq and Afghanistan violate Geneva EVERY day. Point you judgemental finger else where. And rape? really? Please point out my post advocating rape...oh yeah not going to find one but nice attempt at a smear campaign...but fuck yeah I could have put a flamethrower to good use a couple of times.

'why play by a set of rules when your opponent doesn't'

You said anything goes, rape is a common 'practice' of war in many countries would you like some information on it?

You think of these people as savage and barbaric which implies you think of yourself as better than them then advocate any means to fight them.

Well Missy not being beholden to an internationally prescribed set of rules and not using good tactics in a counterinsurgency are not the same thing. Rape would not be in line with winning hearts and minds and there fore would not be a good tactic. FM 3-24 spells out pretty well the proper way to wage some military operations. A U.S. Soldier was charged with rape in Iraq and he was tried and convicted...not under Geneva but because it is against the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. We don't need Geneva to combat an insurgency effective we need good leaders down to the platoon level and competent Soldiers.

Who are "these people" you speak of and where did I describe them as savage and barbaric and where did I imply I was better?

I am curious though with your obvious extensive experience in military operations and counterinsurgency do you have a better way to combat these adversaries or simply like to point your finger?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Pretty easy to say from the sideline. Lets put your life on the line and the lives of your closest friends and then see how you feel about it. The adversaries in Iraq and Afghanistan violate Geneva EVERY day. Point you judgemental finger else where. And rape? really? Please point out my post advocating rape...oh yeah not going to find one but nice attempt at a smear campaign...but fuck yeah I could have put a flamethrower to good use a couple of times.

'why play by a set of rules when your opponent doesn't'

You said anything goes, rape is a common 'practice' of war in many countries would you like some information on it?

You think of these people as savage and barbaric which implies you think of yourself as better than them then advocate any means to fight them.

Well Missy not being beholden to an internationally prescribed set of rules and not using good tactics in a counterinsurgency are not the same thing. Rape would not be in line with winning hearts and minds and there fore would not be a good tactic. FM 3-24 spells out pretty well the proper way to wage some military operations. A U.S. Soldier was charged with rape in Iraq and he was tried and convicted...not under Geneva but because it is against the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. We don't need Geneva to combat an insurgency effective we need good leaders down to the platoon level and competent Soldiers.

Who are "these people" you speak of and where did I describe them as savage and barbaric and where did I imply I was better?

I am curious though with your obvious extensive experience in military operations and counterinsurgency do you have a better way to combat these adversaries or simply like to point your finger?

You were taking the Apocalypse Now approach to combat.
You were criticising their methods and saying international law shouldnt really matter in cases where your opponent doesn't adhere to them.
There are only two conclusions to draw from that, you either stick to international law because you think it is right and proper to do so, hence superior. If you criticise your opponent for their behaviour what else are people to think?

I study military history. Perhaps US/UK leaders should do the same, they seem to have learnt nothing from Vietnam.


The point is this, you can not win against these people.
If their culture changes it will come from within and not by your or our direct meddling.

[VictorCharlie]

'why play by a set of rules when your opponent doesn't'

You said anything goes, rape is a common 'practice' of war in many countries would you like some information on it?

You think of these people as savage and barbaric which implies you think of yourself as better than them then advocate any means to fight them.

Well Missy not being beholden to an internationally prescribed set of rules and not using good tactics in a counterinsurgency are not the same thing. Rape would not be in line with winning hearts and minds and there fore would not be a good tactic. FM 3-24 spells out pretty well the proper way to wage some military operations. A U.S. Soldier was charged with rape in Iraq and he was tried and convicted...not under Geneva but because it is against the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. We don't need Geneva to combat an insurgency effective we need good leaders down to the platoon level and competent Soldiers.

Who are "these people" you speak of and where did I describe them as savage and barbaric and where did I imply I was better?

I am curious though with your obvious extensive experience in military operations and counterinsurgency do you have a better way to combat these adversaries or simply like to point your finger?

You were taking the Apocalypse Now approach to combat.
You were criticising their methods and saying international law shouldnt really matter in cases where your opponent doesn't adhere to them.
There are only two conclusions to draw from that, you either stick to international law because you think it is right and proper to do so, hence superior. If you criticise your opponent for their behaviour what else are people to think?

I study military history. Perhaps US/UK leaders should do the same, they seem to have learnt nothing from Vietnam.


The point is this, you can not win against these people.
If their culture changes it will come from within and not by your or our direct meddling.

As I asked before who is "these people" again? And what do you mean by the Apcalyspe Now approach? My approach is that it shouldn't be up to someone with no skin in the game such as yourself to dictate how war should be fought. Let the commanders on the battlefield make these decisions. I'm not sure what you mean by criticize my opponent. Are you saying you support and endorse the tactics used by AQI/ShiaMilitias/Taliban?

[Nameless]

they signed the Geneva Convention and that according to them, they can be trialed, especially as most of their wrong doing isn't even related to what they did with the terrorists/rebels, the uniform for the ennemies is irrelevant to the fact that they did wage a fake war, being responsible for the demise of millions of innocents including more than 500 000 innocent children. If seriously somebody thinks we can't trial them, it's like saying that the government can get away with whatever they want, even based on a lie because they are the government. if it's true, I'll become prime minister of Canada and I'll go claim by force something, whatever it is, I'll carpet bomb everyone on that island to save as many canadian soldier's life as possible and fuck for the innocent victims because anyway, collateral damage happens. And what if people don't like it? Well, if Blair and Bush couldn't be trial for an illegal war just like I do and for being responsible for the death of 500 000 children plus countless civilians, why would I? It's all about private interests and being the prime minister/president to have the authority to go an get it.

[VictorCharlie]

they signed the Geneva Convention and that according to them, they can be trialed, especially as most of their wrong doing isn't even related to what they did with the terrorists/rebels, the uniform for the ennemies is irrelevant to the fact that they did wage a fake war, being responsible for the demise of millions of innocents including more than 500 000 innocent children. If seriously somebody thinks we can't trial them, it's like saying that the government can get away with whatever they want, even based on a lie because they are the government. if it's true, I'll become prime minister of Canada and I'll go claim by force something, whatever it is, I'll carpet bomb everyone on that island to save as many canadian soldier's life as possible and fuck for the innocent victims because anyway, collateral damage happens. And what if people don't like it? Well, if Blair and Bush couldn't be trial for an illegal war just like I do and for being responsible for the death of 500 000 children plus countless civilians, why would I? It's all about private interests and being the prime minister/president to have the authority to go an get it.

You keep bringing this up but your article specifically states that the embargo is a result of the UN and since 1991. So I guess every leader of every nation in the UN that voted for the sanctions is a war criminal?

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Well Missy not being beholden to an internationally prescribed set of rules and not using good tactics in a counterinsurgency are not the same thing. Rape would not be in line with winning hearts and minds and there fore would not be a good tactic. FM 3-24 spells out pretty well the proper way to wage some military operations. A U.S. Soldier was charged with rape in Iraq and he was tried and convicted...not under Geneva but because it is against the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. We don't need Geneva to combat an insurgency effective we need good leaders down to the platoon level and competent Soldiers.

Who are "these people" you speak of and where did I describe them as savage and barbaric and where did I imply I was better?

I am curious though with your obvious extensive experience in military operations and counterinsurgency do you have a better way to combat these adversaries or simply like to point your finger?

You were taking the Apocalypse Now approach to combat.
You were criticising their methods and saying international law shouldnt really matter in cases where your opponent doesn't adhere to them.
There are only two conclusions to draw from that, you either stick to international law because you think it is right and proper to do so, hence superior. If you criticise your opponent for their behaviour what else are people to think?

I study military history. Perhaps US/UK leaders should do the same, they seem to have learnt nothing from Vietnam.


The point is this, you can not win against these people.
If their culture changes it will come from within and not by your or our direct meddling.

As I asked before who is "these people" again? And what do you mean by the Apcalyspe Now approach? My approach is that it shouldn't be up to someone with no skin in the game such as yourself to dictate how war should be fought. Let the commanders on the battlefield make these decisions. I'm not sure what you mean by criticize my opponent. Are you saying you support and endorse the tactics used by AQI/ShiaMilitias/Taliban?

They are fighting as they should perfectly.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Sources - Antiwar.com

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Huge gaps between Iraq death estimates

Iraq Body Count

It's a shame that US soliders have been killed but please don't ask me to care more for your losses when hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civillians have been killed.