Jump to content

Teflon Tony


Bugsy
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Bugbear"]Starting to wriggle like a fish on a hook.

Am I the only one who thinks that both him and Bush should face charges over their lies and deceit in starting the Iraq war.


[:@][:@]
[/quote]

Your a bit late in the day with that thought mate, get in the queue[;-)]. I don't see any reason why they should not both be charged with 'war crimes' and put on trial at the Hague. I would also like to see TB charged in the UK but I believe there are certain rules about what you say in Parliament and get away with it. Perhaps thats why in recent interview on the matter he didn't look worried in the least. I don't know how how he sleep at night with the thought that it was him, and him alone, that sent some of our young brave men and women to their deaths fighting an illegal war. [:@]

His latest statement about not liking the regime anyway and that a regime change was necessary gives the impression to me that if you don't like the government of a particular country its OK to just invade it and put your own puppets in charge. What a DH these people really are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong - as you may already have gathered, to say I loathe politicians would prolly be an understatement.  However, last time I bothered to check, the UK was still (at least on the face of it) a democracy.  Every adult Britain (except, I think, members of the Lords, prisoners and those nicked recently for gerrymandering, personation etc) may vote.  Every one shares the resposibility for the acts of our elected government.  To slough off all the blame for this war (or for anything else) onto someone like Blair smacks of a primitive (though understandable) desire to get dear Tony or Georgie to eat our sins for us.  We should remember (and have the courage) to stand up and voice our feelings at the time these things are taking place.  Even if the RedTops are against us.  We cannot purse our lips on the sidelines after the event and expect to resurrect those who have so wastefully died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="buelligan"]

Don't get me wrong - as you may already have gathered, to say I loathe politicians would prolly be an understatement.  However, last time I bothered to check, the UK was still (at least on the face of it) a democracy.  Every adult Britain (except, I think, members of the Lords, prisoners and those nicked recently for gerrymandering, personation etc) may vote.  Every one shares the resposibility for the acts of our elected government.  To slough off all the blame for this war (or for anything else) onto someone like Blair smacks of a primitive (though understandable) desire to get dear Tony or Georgie to eat our sins for us.  We should remember (and have the courage) to stand up and voice our feelings at the time these things are taking place.  Even if the RedTops are against us.  We cannot purse our lips on the sidelines after the event and expect to resurrect those who have so wastefully died.

[/quote]

There is a lot of supposition in that statement 'buelligan.

"The UK is a Democracy", now thats an interesting theory.

"We all share the responsibility for their actions" - bit dificult that given that they con their way into power and then, generally, do exactly the opposite, safe in the knowledge that they have four years to 'feather their nests' before the next round of lies.

Tens of thousands of people staged and took part in protests at the time of the build-up to Iraq and it changed things, not one iota.

Bob Dylan wrote a very good song about it. (Masters of War).

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is only true up to a point Buelligan. I did vote Labour, but war with Iraq was not in the manifesto. When it looked likely, the opinion polls showed that the majority of British people were against it and many demonstrated in the streets. Blair ignored all of this and went to war anyway. Must I really share the responsibility for what Blair did ?

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all very difficult and serious, I think that's the problem.  Most people (if they live in a "democracy" and can be arsed to vote) vote for their Party, then roll over and go back to sleep.  The politicians know this.  If serious, intelligent people really care about what happens in the world, they have to take responsibility and action.  They have to make their voices heard.  Moaning after the event is totally understandable but it achieves nothing (in-so-far as helping those who have really suffered as a result of these actions).  The main reason why most of the dreadful stuff perpetrated on this planet by politicians happens is because people allow it.[:(]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you also have to take into account that the average person does not and can never know the full reasons of the actions of a government.

Like the German public in the 30's and 40's, we are basically fed propaganda. What the government wants us to know is normally only released.

Also, the reports in the papers and tv, is not necessarily fact either, merely someone elses perspective of what they think is happening.

I think that's part of the reason democracy doesn't work very well, because no one is able to make a proper informed decision because it is impossible to have all the facts.

And then of course, Sun readers who also have the right to vote....

I'm glad in a way that I can't vote anywhere, no idea what to do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The politicians know this.  If serious, intelligent people really care about what happens in the world, they have to take responsibility and action.  They have to make their voices heard

But they did, there were demonstrations, protests etc - its also true in our Democracy that the buck stops with the PM and in this case it was his decision to take us into War, even though he had already been told the liklihood of there being WMD's was scant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's absolutely true RH.  IIRC, the largest UK anti-war demo had between 500K and 2M participants (depending on who you believe).  Globally about 36M people protested.  Sounds a lot doesn't it?  But, I suppose, those in the driving seat would compare that number with the number who are eligible to vote and consider it a minority.  How many here took part I wonder, or even wrote to their MPs?  The only reason I ask is because, next time, and you can be sure there will be a next time, we could learn from our mistakes and act appropriately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blair in concert with Bush lied. plain and simple fact.

Blair's cronies sexed up a dossier to "prove" the risks from WMD: then when this was found to be totally false they said the justification was Moral Cause.

The USA and the UK are both leading founding members of UN: they both went again UN decree. So they cannot claim they were acting on UN directions.

What they did (As Lord Goldsmith apparently now claims he advised) was illegal.

Under the headings of the nuremberg protocols they are war criminals, since they illegally invaded another nation and loads of people lost their lives.

Cheney and Rumsfield plotted the Iraq invasion as long ago as 1999: they wanted the oil. Contracts for the reconstruction were awarded to such as Pullman Kellog, Bechtel and Cheney's old outfit Haliburton before Bush had even announced his plans; and before he had been given persmission from congress and the senate.

Its all a matter of record.

Look which major oil companies have reaped a rich harvest!

led by Exxon and the rest.

It aint rocket science old mates!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Richard"]There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq though. The Yanks and Brits took them over when they invaded! I got the following sent by email today, which kind of suits this thread: "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character give him power." Abraham Lincoln.[/quote]

Sorry but I have to disagree in part. The primary WMD's that Iraq had were toxin based (biological and gas) rather than nuclear. I agree that this is a fact as they used them on their own people or rather Iraqis of a different tribe.

Prior to the illegal invasion the UN inspectors could not find any such weapons, only signs that they had indeed been destroyed along with the production units. After the invasion nobody, I repeat nobody, has been able to find any WMD's or sites where they could be manufactured. Saddam had therefore complied with the UN's requirements to the letter as we now know. Saddam was never successfully prosecuted for having these weapons. What they finally managed to convict him of was committing genocide. That in its self was somewhat questionable as whilst toxic weapons had be used there is doubt that he personally used or ordered them to be used. He probably did but in law he has to be proved to have done so and the evidence is rather sketchy to say the  least.

Lets not also forget the reason why he invaded Kuwaiti. The Americans supplied the Kuwaiti's with technology that allowed them to drill oil wells that could not only go vertical but horizontally as well and thus they were able to 'tap' in to existing Iraqi oil deposits across the border, or more to the point under the border. When challenged the Kuwaiti's simply said "tuff luck, if you want to pick a fight over it just remember we are backed by the US". I am not defending Saddam by any manes but it takes two to tango and in this case three with the UK hanging on to the tails of the US coat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems apparent that the one thing old saddam lacked was a delivery system capable of hitting Europe in "45 minutes".

And why and how was British intelligence so poor?

Costs the taxpayer enough!

Surely after the matter of the big tubes (Was it mattrix Churchill or summat? and Doc Gerry Bull), the intelligence boys would have been watching old saddam from that point on?

Just googled it: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/other/supergun.htm

Weve been lied to old mates that's the truth.

And what about that poor geezer Dr Kelly: so a doc mate tells me, slitting the old wrists is about the most painful way you can do yourself in.

But this bloke Doc Kelly, was supposed to be a world top man on poisons and biological and chemical weapons.

Surely, he would have done himself in with some chemical that meant he drifted off to sleep and felt no pain.

Don't add up to this old lad from London, Mate!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't agree with any of you. Eggs thrown at Prescott and Warsi, shoes at Bush and now someone has thrown a metal object in Berlusconi's face. Much as we might enjoy it just for a while we really can't condone violence against public figures can we ?

Hoddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...