Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why hasn't Geroge Bush or Tony Blair been executed for crimes against humanity? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    The fact is the US and British military were only responsible for killing 1-2% of the total civilian casualties in the Iraq war. The rest were killed by either Iraqis or extremist Muslims. They cannot be blamed for what others do really. If you also factor in that of that 1-2% of civilian casualties almost none were on purpose, and almost 100% of the enemies were. Furthermore Saddam deliberately killed far more innocent people on purpose during his reign, and if we'd left him in place who is to say he wouldn't have eventually killed far more people? Especially once his sons took over.

    Luckily OP cry babies like yourself don't have any say in international policy.
    Do you have a source? Or do I just take you word for it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hash007)
    Explain. And where is this 14 year old you're talking about.
    Well, anyone over 14 who believes this is a ****ing moron. This thread is so stupid I'm not even going to waste any more time on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by de_monies)
    It's not that they stole the oil from them. They created oil contracts and made sure that the currency was in USD. In the Metro, they showed an Iraq-US trade deal for oil. Coincidence much?

    Also with regards to the democracy/dictating thing. Iraq is now pretty much a puppet gov't and has laws pretty much dictated by the US now
    War is politics by other means. If one dictator was going to over turn the economic supremacy, and therefore bring down their quality of life (and by extension cause conflicts and deaths), of the world super power and its citizens then the US is well within its right to go to war. It is there to protect their interests. Economically crippling the US is an open invitation to being crushed.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blueflare)
    Well, anyone over 14 who believes this is a ****ing moron. This thread is so stupid I'm not even going to waste any more time on it.
    Explain yourself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    because they are not from middle eastern countries!!!.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hash007)
    Do you have a source? Or do I just take you word for it.
    I'm on a mobile at the minute but feel free to do a google search. If I remember rightly someone did a statistical analysis of the deaths recorded since the start of the war taken from a peace activist site. Sorry I can't be more of a help at the minute. Perhaps try 'Iraqi civilian casualties 1%' or something.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Oh come on its a tad too simplistic to brandish Blair/Bush with the same brush as Hussain.

    True, hundreds of thousands died in Iraq, but remember that the majority of the deaths were and still are at the hands of insurgents/millitia and not Western Troops.

    Secondly, as wrong as Bush and Blair were, to suggest they were as bad as Hussain is actually quite disrespectful. Saddam directly ordered the killings of hundreds of thousands of people based on nothing other than ethnicity. He directly ordered the chemical bombing of innocent civilians. Then lets not forget the estimated 1million that died in wars that he led (Iran etc) + the estimated 200,000 additional civilians who died under his rule as a result the informant led state, kidnappings, gassing of whole rebel villages and the general awful standard of living.

    True, Blair/Bush may have ordered the wrongful invasion of Iraq, but the events that followed were not much more than the results of war, which is and always has been complete and utter chaos. People got caught in the cross fire by accident . Saddam's Iraq was no accident. It was a planned Genocide. To compare them on a like to like basis simply shows your naivety of the situation.

    Iraq is by no means paradise now, but its a hell of a lot better than it was 8 years ago.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Don't worry, they'll be dealt with in hell
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    The fact is the US and British military were only responsible for killing 1-2% of the total civilian casualties in the Iraq war. The rest were killed by either Iraqis or extremist Muslims. They cannot be blamed for what others do really. If you also factor in that of that 1-2% of civilian casualties almost none were on purpose, and almost 100% of the enemies were. Furthermore Saddam deliberately killed far more innocent people on purpose during his reign, and if we'd left him in place who is to say he wouldn't have eventually killed far more people? Especially once his sons took over.

    Luckily OP cry babies like yourself don't have any say in international policy.
    Where on earth did you get that from? I love how some people decide to create their own statistics off the top of their heads.


    It was in fact a completely illegal war based on false pretenses and action SHOULD be made.
    The whole weapons of mass destruction thing was just complete BS. It was all a way to steal oil among other things.

    Iraq was a completely different place and in a much better situation before the war. Civilians weren't dying everyday for absolutely no reason. Yes Saddam killed some people, but what he did is nothing compared to what Bush and Blair have done as a result of the war. Over a million people dead. Its just completely ridiculous. I dont understand how the UN can just watch all this happen and do nothing about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Here is one link hash http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/11Myths.htm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arbissah)
    Where on earth did you get that from? I love how some people decide to create their own statistics off the top of their heads.


    It was in fact a completely illegal war based on false pretenses and action SHOULD be made.
    The whole weapons of mass destruction thing was just complete BS. It was all a way to steal oil among other things.

    Iraq was a completely different place and in a much better situation before the war. Civilians weren't dying everyday for absolutely no reason. Yes Saddam killed some people, but what he did is nothing compared to what Bush and Blair have done as a result of the war. Over a million people dead. Its just completely ridiculous. I dont understand how the UN can just watch all this happen and do nothing about it.
    And what do you think the UN is going to do to 2 of the most powerful states in the world? LOL. They are the UN. Here is the only statistical analysis of deaths that I can find:
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/11Myths.htm
    If you want to disagree I suggest you post some stats that disagree, I don't care what site you get it from, just don't whinge at me like a cry baby liberal cus it won't sway me because I've assessed this situation using logic rather than emotion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    And what do you think the UN is going to do to 2 of the most powerful states in the world? LOL. They are the UN. Here is the only statistical analysis of deaths that I can find:
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/11Myths.htm
    If you want to disagree I suggest you post some stats that disagree, I don't care what site you get it from, just don't whinge at me like a cry baby liberal cus it won't sway me because I've assessed this situation using logic rather than emotion.
    Haha please tell us how you've accomplished to do so?


    Just look at that website. It is a completely biased site and is very obviously anti-islam and all it seems to do is make sarcastic jokes about islam and insult it.

    It might seem to you that they're making good points but the truth is they're not, none of them are properly backed up and in the end they just make conclusions out of nowhere. A lot of BS.

    Just tell me one thing, where exactly were these insurgents and terrorist groups before the 2003 invasion that supposedly do 98% of the killing? That's right. They didn't exist.


    Haha I really cant get over that. 98% Iraqis. Complete bull. More like 98% american/british troops and 2% Iraqis.

    How naive some people can be is really beyond me. It seems to me that everyone these days is getting brainwashed by the media or really by just looking at one website, in your case.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arbissah)
    Haha please tell us how you've accomplished to do so?


    Just look at that website. It is a completely biased site and is very obviously anti-islam and all it seems to do is make sarcastic jokes about islam and insult it.

    It might seem to you that they're making good points but the truth is they're not, none of them are properly backed up and in the end they just make conclusions out of nowhere. A lot of BS.

    Just tell me one thing, where exactly were these insurgents and terrorist groups before the 2003 invasion that supposedly do 98% of the killing? That's right. They didn't exist.


    Haha I really cant get over that. 98% Iraqis. Complete bull. More like 98% american/british troops and 2% Iraqis.

    How naive some people can be is really beyond me. It seems to me that everyone these days is getting brainwashed by the media or really by just looking at one website, in your case.
    If you just read the site you'd see they've done a statistical analysis of a liberal douche bags site listing body count and who killed them. And what site exactly do you expect to counter your stupid claims? Iloveislam.com? Hippyloversrus.com? Sadly you can't just discount facts and websites by expressing dislike of them. Like I said feel free to present me any website you want, be it treehuggingfags.com or whatever I don't care as long as the information is sound. Of course you won't find this because you're in the wrong, not that you'd ever admit that, your views are too ingrained to accept anything that goes against your biases. As you say I'm just looking at one website, but that's still infinitely more than your none . You are welcome to go through and crunch the numbers and work out the stats for yourself, but that wouldn't confirm your feelings (note: not thoughts), so you won't.

    It is interesting you call me the brainwashed one when your view is held by the massive majority, and to state contary as I do is extremely unpopular. Not to mention you haven't presented a single fact.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by de_monies)
    It's not that they stole the oil from them. They created oil contracts and made sure that the currency was in USD. In the Metro, they showed an Iraq-US trade deal for oil. Coincidence much?

    Also with regards to the democracy/dictating thing. Iraq is now pretty much a puppet gov't and has laws pretty much dictated by the US now
    And your point is?

    You'd still rather have a genocidal dictator?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hash007)
    That was the reason they killed Saddam Hussein, Bush and Blair have done the same or even worse atrocities than him, so why haven't they been accused or executed?
    Or do western leaders not count.

    This documentary is great btw, http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=198443
    Saw a thread about it yesterday.
    Bush and Blair did not attempt to commit genocide.

    Bush and Blair did not illegally invade two countries - Iran and Kuwait (and no, the Iraq war was perfectly legal).

    Bush and Blair did not suppress the Iraqi people, killing everyone who opposed their views.

    Bush and Blair did not kill an estimated 2 - 3 million people.

    Bush and Blair are not war criminals; they have not committed anything that even resembles a war crime, let alone a crime against humanity.

    Now, begone.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arbissah)
    Where on earth did you get that from? I love how some people decide to create their own statistics off the top of their heads.


    It was in fact a completely illegal war based on false pretenses and action SHOULD be made.
    The whole weapons of mass destruction thing was just complete BS. It was all a way to steal oil among other things.

    Iraq was a completely different place and in a much better situation before the war. Civilians weren't dying everyday for absolutely no reason. Yes Saddam killed some people, but what he did is nothing compared to what Bush and Blair have done as a result of the war. Over a million people dead. Its just completely ridiculous. I dont understand how the UN can just watch all this happen and do nothing about it.
    It wasn't illegal.

    Saddam did not surrender his biological and chemical weapons. Instead, he fooled the UN inspectors by hidding and relocating them.

    "Saddam killed some people" - try an estimated 2 - 3 million. The vast majority of people dying in Iraq today are being killed by terrorists, not by the U.S.-led coalition.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    It wasn't illegal.

    Saddam did not surrender his biological and chemical weapons. Instead, he fooled the UN inspectors by hidding and relocating them.

    "Saddam killed some people" - try an estimated 2 - 3 million. The vast majority of people dying in Iraq today are being killed by terrorists, not by the U.S.-led coalition.
    I am so glad someone else on here is capable of thinking logically instead of building emotionally led straw men left right and centre... If Saddam killed 3 million people that averages out to almost the same kill count since the invasion, if not more. And now Iraq isn't ruled by a tyrant, and America has kept its economy secure. Why these stupid tards want Bush and Blair to take all the blame for terrorism and sectarian violence is beyond me. They just have a general feeling that was is wrong and want to go with the crowd, then work backwards from there: rather than looking at the facts then forming an opinion they form an opinion then find the facts. It is confirmation bias writ large. It seems especially bad amongst Muslims who want to be the victim all the time, despite being the major perpetrators of murders the world over. 'But but you invaded and then we started killing ourselves', gimme a break!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It amazes me how much people hate W. and Blair. I don't agree with all of their decisions, but it's not like they did things out of malice. They followed the advice of their intelligence information, even though at the time it was flawed.

    Both made bad decisions (as does every world leader at times), but I do think that it's easier to call them criminals when you were not the one making the decision at that time. It's easier to complain later once more information is in.

    As far as Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody likes war. But W. acted on the intelligence he had at the time. They had soldiers on the news recently who stated that pulling out of Afghanistan and Iraq now when the nations are still unstable would be an insult to all the work they have done and would make the sacrifices they and other soldiers had committed be in vain.

    I want the soldiers home as much as anybody, but the soldiers are there for a reason. I would hate to make their sacrifices be in vain. I do certainly understand the viewpoints of those who want all soldiers home now. I'm not sure where I stand on the matter.

    It is amazing how W. is often more vilified than Saddam Hussein, or at least he is talked about more. Blair is still somewhat in the spotlight, as he is not yet retired from politics. W. and his wife were on TV here recently talking about their new books, but other than W. has mostly stayed out of the spotlight since he left the whitehouse. Now Obama, who was so hyped when he got into office, is vilified quite a bit as well.

    Really, I think we should all have at least some respect for our leaders. They have a lot of decisions to make. I don't envy their positions so I try not to criticize them unfairly. But few presidents or world leaders are looked at objectively while they are in office.

    As far as Hurricane Katrina and W., as W. explained on Oprah, the President cannot offer aid until the mayor or governor requests it, which they did not immediately. He could only send unarmed troops into New Orleans. Not knowing the conditions on the ground he was reluctant to do it. He was bound by the law, so he couldn't do much until the local leaders told him to. But I'm not sure exactly where in the law it says this, so I could be wrong.

    Here's some info on the Insurrection Act, which was amended in 2007.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act

    I do find it mindboggling that someone could say that Bush and Blair are worse than Saddam. I don't agree with all of their policies, but they are not that bad.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hussein:
    Fascist megalomaniac with no regard for anything but his own welfare, and was willing to torture and brutally murder anyone who even uttered a word against him.

    Blair:
    A leader who made an incredibly tough decision and sent troops overseas. He had the balls to actually do something which he thought was for the benefit of the country, and while not perfect by any standards, had enough balls to try something controversial. Does anyone remember Thatcher? Same principle.

    Bush:
    A bit dim, made bad decisions and probably shouldn't have been in office.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I doubt they would ever be charged or tried for war crimes let alone be sentenced.
    Not only do they have the ability to talk themselves out of it, they have enough money and enough friends in high places to prevent that happerning.

    Plus what Western Country would allow that in these modern times?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 21, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.