U.S. Air Strike Kills 40 In Iraqi Mosque (Read On For The Full-On War Crimes Debate)

[Soton Seagull]

No the people who completely played into their hands following that attrocity are equally to blame! Or maybe its the people who funded Bin Laden years before, the good old US of A?

That'll the same USA that funded Saddam Hussain in the war against Iran?

As with all countries it is all about current political interest. Proverbial sleeping partners are changed as often as the weather, hence Libya at present.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

AD - You can't honestly have thought no action would be taken after 9/11.

USA arming Bin Laden ?

And just because you give someone a gun , you don't force them to use it. Its down to the individual the actions they take and the consequences of their actions.

 

[Titanic]

Its easy to have a pop but no one yet has given me a sensible or practical response to " If you were George Bush on 10th September 2001 what would you have done ? ".

Just one small, and largely irrelevant point - the attacks in N.Y. happened on 11th September - so whatever he did on the 10th was not particularly important.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Good point

 

[Albion Dan]

AD - You can't honestly have thought no action would be taken after 9/11.

USA arming Bin Laden ?

And just because you give someone a gun , you don't force them to use it. Its down to the individual the actions they take and the consequences of their actions.

Of course not, I would like to have seen Al Quaeda rooted out put up against a wall and shot, I also have to say I agreed mostly to actions in Afghanistan.

The next action should have been to sort Israel out and undermine the very reason that these muslim fanatics have issue with the west, but no, the USA still fund and support the opressive Jewish regime that is the root casue of all the Middle East - West problems. Bush is a f***ing moron for his actions and I dont really see how anyone can still defend him.

 

[SM BHAFC]

What a sanctimonious bunch, particulary my old friend Albion Dan, I don't have to admit being wrong pal because I don't believe I am.

After Sept 11th it was a different world we went into Iraq and may go into other places beacuse as a country Iraq had continually pissed everyone about threatening to use weapons that we know they had. And yes I am aware that we have not found any and yes most of them were sold by us. But they have used them so I think the arguement ends there.

The majority of Iraqi's who suprise suprise actually want us there helping them get it sorted are lying let them have good old Saddam back.

When there was a survey just a few weeks ago that cleary showed that the majority want us there I let it pass no point in pointing out that what I had argued for over a year ago was right. I presumed it had been accepted that what we did was the right thing to do, Blair did not handle it well IMHO but at the end of the day he was right.

Then we have the first real test and probelm in the first year and some of the people on here are acting as though the whole of Iraq has risen up and thrown the alliance out saying they want Saddam back.

What a crock of shit that is you lot are so far up your own asses you can probably turn your selves inside out.


Oil oil oil blah blah blah US/UK so evil fucks sake this was strated on Sept 11th and I know there was no direct link between Saddam and that tragedy but the world changed that day and Saddam did not realsie this and he paid the price. good rddance

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

That day provided the reason for Bush to get rid of Saddam. Reason or excuse is down to your personal view. What we were doing there only Tony knows.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

SM BHAFC



At last someone talking some sence !.

 

[DTES]

sort of agree with your thoughts Albion Dan - my problem is - what sort of response should Bush have given to Sept 11?? (just to change the subject a little) I don't know myself what the right response would be - just interested to know what people think... I can't believe that is wasn't somehow linked to Iraq - its the same monster with a different head so to speak I think...

No offence, but rubbish. Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, Saddam and Bin Laden were closer to being at war with each other than being allies.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Its like a line of dominoes falling down but I strongly believe the person responsible for the first domino falling down is Osama Bin Laden.

Until Bush decided to invade Iraq, al Qaeda was not a player in that country. They are now.

Bush is responsible for that. And, as is becoming obvious as each day passes, the US Army has no effective way to deal with al Qaeda.

 

[Albion Dan]

And yes I am aware that we have not found any and yes most of them were sold by us. But they have used them so I think the arguement ends there.

SM old pal, when Iraq used those weapons, the USA did not give a monkeys, in fact they were pro Iraq at that point in time as it was part of the Iranian war.

we have completely unstabalised the entire region by our actions in Iraq and the mess it will be left in.

Just answer this, Is the world a safer place after Iraq? Have we made any steps forward in the war against terror by going into Iraq? Are we going to go into South Korea? Doesnt the Libyan develeloment completely undermine your argument?

 

[Zeitgeist]

Its son easy isn't it to take pops at George Bush but what would your response have been to 9/11. How could anyone ever imagine that 4 jumbo jets with innocent civilians be flown into 2 tower blocks over 1200 feet high killing 3000 innocent civilians from over 80 countries ( including muslims ).

He had more on his plate than any US president in history.

Now in my opinion the 9/11 attacks were totally unprovoked and as such these stupid little men with warped ideas of martyrdom and sleeping with 20 virgins decided to set fire to the sleeping Lions tail.

Its inevitable there was going to be severe retribution, firstly with Afghansitan kicking out the Taliban ( no bad thing ) and then moving onto Iraq, kicking out Hussein ( no bad thing ).

Its easy to have a pop but noone yet has given me a sensible or practical response to " If you were George Bush on 10th September 2001 what would you have done ? ".

Yep, Gareth has his stars n stripes tinted specs. on again. The correct response would have been to focus on the REAL enemy ALL the time, not using 9/11 as a convenient excuse to get revenge on Sadam for pappy's balls up ten years or so earlier. Instead of being able to focus their energies solely on the real danger, Bin laden and all his different factions, the allies have got themslves bogged down in Beirut n Vietnam part two, with no end in sight while Al Queda, the hidden enemy continues with atrocities. Sadam was an evil tyrant, but as a threat to World peace he was a busted flush and being kept in check. There's plenty of evil tyrants in the World, but the US and UK quite happily turn a blind eye in the name of commerce. I don't hear of any plans to invade Saudia Arabia to "free the people"? One of the most obnoxious represive regimes in the World.......

 

[Simster]

Are we going to go into South Korea?

We were there only 2 years ago for the World Cup

Personally, I will continue to believe Bush is a war-mongering fuckwitt with no interest in anything other than oil or money until he uses his influence to sort out the situation in Israel. SM, you put your point across convincingly enough, but in all seriousness, how many British body bags have to come home before you believe we were wrong to go there? None? half a million? I'm just curious...

 

[Simster]

I don't hear of any plans to invade Saudia Arabia to "free the people"? One of the most obnoxious represive regimes in the World.......

Or Burma, or Indonesia. Or Pakistan which "temporily" overthrew an elected government but has just been lauded as one of America's "greatest" allies.

Whereas of course little old Cuba is part of the axis of evil.

 

[SM BHAFC]

Albion Dan

1. No it's the same as before, since Bib laden and his lot started trying to destroy the west and particulary after 11th Sept it is not safe. Before that started it was safer.

2. Yes we have, Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to anyone and other countries realise that things have changed.

3. Sth Korea I hope not, as for the North, in my opinion they realise things are against them and with a bit of political shenanagins will come round.

4. What the fact Libya has given up their WMD?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

 

[SM BHAFC]

Simster there is no price on freedom is there, I hate to see UK/US troops being killed and Iraqi's come to that but do we just sit back and take an isolationist stance. Our history kind of dictates we should be involved but maybe you guys have a point.

In all seriousness i do somtimes think we should just pull all our troops out of everywhere and just concentrate on looking after our borders. I suppose it is like seeing something happen in a street do you walk on by or get involved. Personally and to my detriment on occasion I get involved if I see something wrong happening.

Bin laden and the rest are trying to destroy the western way of life, and attacked a country that has paid the ultimate sacrifice on many occasions for the rest of the world, personally I am in with the US on this.

 

[Caveman]

With SM on this one!

Unfortunately, what will probably happen if England gets hit by a terror attack is a race war, you only have to look at places like Burnley etc and the riots they had.

 

[Dandyman]

Albion Dan

1. No it's the same as before, since Bib laden and his lot started trying to destroy the west and particulary after 11th Sept it is not safe. Before that started it was safer.

2. Yes we have, Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to anyone and other countries realise that things have changed.

3. Sth Korea I hope not, as for the North, in my opinion they realise things are against them and with a bit of political shenanagins will come round.

4. What the fact Libya has given up their WMD?

SM, I think you get points for a reasoned argument, but...

1. You acknowledge that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that no WMDs have been found there. Therefore what LEGAL excuse was there for the invasion ? Regime change per se is clearly against international law and does beg the question of what do those who advocate it on human rights grounds want to do in respect of our new best friends in the former Soviet republics.

2. I have no doubt that most Iraqis are delighted to see the back of SH. I doubt they are so happy with the US executive order which allowed the wholesale rape of Iraqi industry and the immediate "repatriation" of profits overseas.

3. Afganistan is hard to see as a victory. Bin Laden was not caught, the country is still run by warlords, women probably dream of being so well treated as to qualify as second class citizens and they have just had a bumper poppy crop coming to a smackhead near you soon.

In short illegal, unjustified, and a right bloody mess.

 

[Simster]

Simster there is no price on freedom is there, I hate to see UK/US troops being killed and Iraqi's come to that but do we just sit back and take an isolationist stance. Our history kind of dictates we should be involved but maybe you guys have a point.

Well mate, we are being expected to believe that George Bush has a keen interest on world affairs, yet he didn't even know the name of the Pakistani President when he came into power.

In all seriousness i do sometimes think we should just pull all our troops out of everywhere and just concentrate on looking after our borders. I suppose it is like seeing something happen in a street do you walk on by or get involved. Personally and to my detriment on occasion I get involved if I see something wrong happening.

I don't think you can draw that comparison. In one case, you're risking other people's lives and Bliar didn't listen to his own people who were dead against this invasion in the first place. Hopefully he will pay for that at the ballot box. I must admit to being a bit of a have-a-go hero at times so maybe I'm making that argument to suit my own actions.

Bin laden and the rest are trying to destroy the western way of life, and attacked a country that has paid the ultimate sacrifice on many occasions for the rest of the world, personally I am in with the US on this.

I don't think anyone's arguing with you there, it's just that some of us don't believe Iraq and Saddam had anything to do with this whatsoever.