Home Politics & Debate

so blair confirms it

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/12/tony-blair-iraq-chilcot-inquiry


he would of gone to war anyway, sooooooooo

where can you indict a man like under international law?

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I have better things to do with my time like pass my exams.

    But I think the hague takes care of that kind of thing, no?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well unlike America (the only Western country that isn't :rolleyes:), we're actually a member of the International Criminal Court, so theoretically at least, we have respect for international law, and so if someone brings a case against him, our government should have no problem allowing him to be investigated.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And Carol Turner of the Stop the War Coalition said it was "extraordinary" that Mr Blair was admitting that he was prepared to tailor his arguments to fit the circumstances.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8410071.stm
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What charge would be brought against him though?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ...if someone brings a case against him, our government should have no problem allowing him to be investigated.
    Except that it WOULD have massive problems with this. If Blair was ever to be tried for war crimes - as he rightfully should - it would mean very serious questions being asked of McBroon and the rest of his New Labour friends. Even the Tories, who shamefully supported this war like lapdogs, would face a lot of awkwardness if that bastard was ever sent into court to defend himself.

    Blair, as ever, is using the traditional political trick of only revealing the truth when he knows it cannot do him any harm whatsoever. He always was a first-grade cunt and always will be.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Except that it WOULD have massive problems with this. If Blair was ever to be tried for war crimes - as he rightfully should - it would mean very serious questions being asked of McBroon and the rest of his New Labour friends. Even the Tories, who shamefully supported this war like lapdogs, would face a lot of awkwardness if that bastard was ever sent into court to defend himself.

    Blair, as ever, is using the traditional political trick of only revealing the truth when he knows it cannot do him any harm whatsoever. He always was a first-grade cunt and always will be.
    Well I don't think you have much choice once you've signed up. That's why America have never signed up, because there would be a ridiculous number of people in that country implicated based on their various escapades in Vietnam, South America and the Middle East. Oh and guess which is the only other Western (I suppose) country in the world that hasn't signed up. That's right, you got it in one: our good friends Israel.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well I don't think you have much choice once you've signed up. That's why America have never signed up, because there would be a ridiculous number of people in that country implicated based on their various escapades in Vietnam, South America and the Middle East. Oh and guess which is the only other Western (I suppose) country in the world that hasn't signed up. That's right, you got it in one: our good friends Israel.

    Because they fear it being used as political football and they seem to be right - the people who organised the massacres when Saigon fell (probably about 100-200k killed within a year) sleep soundly in their beds, as do leaders and senior officials from Sri Lanka, Syria et al.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Because they fear it being used as political football and they seem to be right - the people who organised the massacres when Saigon fell (probably about 100-200k killed within a year) sleep soundly in their beds, as do leaders and senior officials from Sri Lanka, Syria et al.

    None of those countries are members of the ICC either. If they were, such people might've been brought to justice. All of the South American countries are members, incidentally. But most importantly, America claims to stand for some higher values of justice, liberty, freedom and democracy, and always proclaims such values when they're actually looking after their own selfish national interests. They're very keen to cite international laws to justify their actions, despite showing no desire to enforce such laws when their own citizens are involved. The fact that you have to point to some less than democratic regimes to find some equivalents should tell you everything you need to know. The fact that Vietnam haven't brought war criminals to justice should have no influence on the decision to prosecute any of the American citizens allegedly involved in war crimes.

    But since you mention it, can I ask you for a link to the massacre you refer to after the fall of Saigon? I've found reference to "re-education camps" which had less than favourable conditions, but nothing about any massacres.

    ETA: Doesn't matter, I think I've found it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Seriously, has this actually changed anyone's opinions?
Sign In or Register to comment.