Animals & Nature1 min ago
Bush and Blair On Trial?
39 Answers
Desmond Tutu has said that Bush and Blair should be tried as war criminals in The Hague. Does he have a point?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19454562
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19454562
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Try to remember that Tutu is an archbishop and therefore, by definition, a fantasist and believer in fairytales. Consequently, no, he doesn't have a point. Like many others, he has failed to see the vast moral difference between telling lies and failing to be correct.
The existence of WMD in Iraq was a known fact before 2003 - they'd been used by Saddam against Iranians and even Iraqis themselves, after all. Inspectors looking for them had been given the runaround for years, so there was no reason to doubt their continued existence in 2003.
The existence of WMD in Iraq was a known fact before 2003 - they'd been used by Saddam against Iranians and even Iraqis themselves, after all. Inspectors looking for them had been given the runaround for years, so there was no reason to doubt their continued existence in 2003.
Wait until Syria and Iran crumble and bingo the Iraqi WMD will emerge. I agree with Quizmaster.
Also, though they were berks not to use the material, Saddam practised genocide on the delta Shiite fishermen as they were housing refugees, or so he thought and, when the Brits got into Basra, they found a grave of 5000 people....Conveniently forgotten by some priest dressed in his frocks over 3000 miles away when his own people are being mown down by the police.
Also, though they were berks not to use the material, Saddam practised genocide on the delta Shiite fishermen as they were housing refugees, or so he thought and, when the Brits got into Basra, they found a grave of 5000 people....Conveniently forgotten by some priest dressed in his frocks over 3000 miles away when his own people are being mown down by the police.
Nox, are you disputing the fact that there is no valid "evidence" for religious belief but only "faith" in some supernatural being? I am simply pointing out that there is, equally, no valid evidence for the belief that Bush and Blair 'lied', though they did get it 'wrong'. In other words, I am as entitled to my view as Tutu is to his...it's just that I believe mine is vastly more logical than his.
I never supported the invasion of Iraq (a majority in the UK did at the time not that that is any justification.) I also greatly admire bishop Tutu. But no, he does not have a point. There's a huge difference between cataclysmic errors of judgment (put them in trial for that perhaps) and war crimes. There's a man sitting in the Kremlin who would go before a war crimes tribunal before Bush and Blair
Icheria if you are referring to Putin you have your facts wrong about Iraq. Putin was doing all he could to find a peaceful solution in Iraq but warmongers Bush and Blair thought they knew best.
Our attack in Libya followed the same pattern where we lied about protecting civilians under the pretext of getting rid of Gaddafi.
We have been the perpetrators of violence in the Middle East. No wonder Russia and China do not believe a word we say.
Our attack in Libya followed the same pattern where we lied about protecting civilians under the pretext of getting rid of Gaddafi.
We have been the perpetrators of violence in the Middle East. No wonder Russia and China do not believe a word we say.
Quizmonster - “... The existence of WMD in Iraq was a known fact before 2003 - they'd been used by Saddam against Iranians and even Iraqis themselves, after all. Inspectors looking for them had been given the runaround for years, so there was no reason to doubt their continued existence in 2003...”
When Tony Blair stood in parliament and declared that Iraq had WMD which had the capability of hitting the UK within 45 minutes of being launched, that was a blatant and massive lie wasn't it?
That ridiculous and spurious claim was THE justification for the UK joining forces with the USA and going to war with Iraq. It was nonsense and all the UN Weapons Inspectors [UNWI] concurred – there were no long-range weapons that could threaten western nations in Iraq. It has now been almost 10 years since Blair's claim and yet still no WMDs have been found. Perhaps they're like the James Bond style hideouts that Osama bin Laden was claimed to have constructed in the Tora Bora mountains by the fantasist, Donald Rumsfeld?
You further say, “... [there is] no valid evidence for the belief that Bush and Blair 'lied', though they did get it 'wrong'...”.
I disagree that they did not lie as I have stated above. You're saying that the UNWI were quite right and that Iraq HAD complied with the UN's Security Resolutions by decommissioning its WMDs (since Bush and Blair were 'wrong' that Saddam still had them). This being the case, and since it is patently obvious that Blair deliberately mislead parliament with the '45 minute' claim which ultimately lead this country to war, would it not seem reasonable to put this man on trial for his part in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people?
When Tony Blair stood in parliament and declared that Iraq had WMD which had the capability of hitting the UK within 45 minutes of being launched, that was a blatant and massive lie wasn't it?
That ridiculous and spurious claim was THE justification for the UK joining forces with the USA and going to war with Iraq. It was nonsense and all the UN Weapons Inspectors [UNWI] concurred – there were no long-range weapons that could threaten western nations in Iraq. It has now been almost 10 years since Blair's claim and yet still no WMDs have been found. Perhaps they're like the James Bond style hideouts that Osama bin Laden was claimed to have constructed in the Tora Bora mountains by the fantasist, Donald Rumsfeld?
You further say, “... [there is] no valid evidence for the belief that Bush and Blair 'lied', though they did get it 'wrong'...”.
I disagree that they did not lie as I have stated above. You're saying that the UNWI were quite right and that Iraq HAD complied with the UN's Security Resolutions by decommissioning its WMDs (since Bush and Blair were 'wrong' that Saddam still had them). This being the case, and since it is patently obvious that Blair deliberately mislead parliament with the '45 minute' claim which ultimately lead this country to war, would it not seem reasonable to put this man on trial for his part in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people?
