Why did 655,000 Iraq people have to die because Blair and Bush wanted glory?

Question

The latest results from UN observers show that over 655,000 Iraq people (young and old mainly non combatants) died as a direct result of an invasion to find weapons of mass distruction. Both Blair and Bush later admitted that there were no weapons of mass distruction in Iraq. Should Blair and Bush face charges of war crimes?

Answer 1

This unprovoked war was predicated on the presence of WMD's and later on the need to oust Saddam. Once the troops determined there were no WMD's and Saddam had been deposed, what glory was there in staying?

The glory must have been in the anticipated profits -- I think it was all about making money. "Rebuilding" Iraq after bombing it and shuttering its state owned businesses. "Securing" Iraq after dismissing all the army and police. Remember, right after the invasion when other UN nations offered to help with the rebuilding? Bush said 'no', it's all ours (and Britain's)!! The spoils of war!

Iraq was at peace before the invasion. Sure, it was a police state, but there was very little violence. There was a slow economy, but high employment and school enrollment. Now there are as many as 500 violent deaths per day, 65-75% are out of work, and many children no longer attend school.

Most of the dead are young and middle aged men, and 70% have died as the result of Iraqi vs. Iraqi violence. Combatants or non combatants, does it matter? A country with a very low murder rate is now a killing field because of US intervention. Troops are dying every day, for what? Their presence is just making the situation worse.

War crimes? I don't know about Britain, but the US is conveniently not a member of the International War Crimes Tribunal. And, Congress recently passed Bush sponsored and driven legislation to retroactively exempt the Bush administration from prosecution for many war crimes.

Answer 2

My oh my where to start...

I don't doubt the figures are accurate. But it always amazes me how the rabidly close-minded far left woolly thinking liberals becry what America and Britain are doing in Iraq when (a) they have never been there and (b) they neatly refuse to confront what Saddam was doing to his country. In one single incident, Saddam slaughtered 180,000 of his own people. With chemical weapons. Where were the far left liberals then? If you could get figures for ten years of rule before the invasion and ten years after, what would you see? The far left only start thier ranting when they can't ignore what's happening anymore.

As for weapons of mass destruction, no we didn't know Saddam had them. We didn't know he didn't, either. We got it wrong - but what if we didn't go in, and he did have them? You can make a biological or chemical warfare factory in a reasonable sized garage. You can store a nuclear bomb in a small van. Iraq is a country the same size as France. We did know that Saddam at least used to have these weapons, and was more than willing to use them. Would you rather Bush and Blair had done nothing and we wake one morning and hear that the cities of Washington and London simply aren't there anymore? Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

As for War Crimes, we should be building statues of these men and be thankful that there are those out there with the balls to make these kind of descisions, to stop a greater war before it begins.

Answer 3

A difficult question to answer as it is a sensitive issue.

Yes more civilians are killed in Iraq by their fellow Iraqi's.

We did not go to war for the oil, we went to war to prevent Saddam using weapons of mass distruction (OK they were not found), but the threat was there and he'd said he'd use them.

Regime change and oil being opened up to the markets are benefits of going to war.

You are right we need to secure the region and make it safe for the ordinary people of Iraq.

I did not support the 1991 as a teenager I was opposed to violence of this kind, I probably had the same thoughts then, as the hundreds of thousands of protestors in 2003.

But by 2003 I was able to make a judgemnt based on the evidence available and have been a frim supporter of the war and will support the allied troops and the actions of the allied countries all the time they are in Iraq.

Lets keep up the work to secure Iraq for it's future generations!!!

Answer 4

this is true the survey was done by the UN and America and is accepted by respected agencies and publications and in fact they say it could well be an underestimation. The UK and US have not only admitted that there were no WMD but also that Iraq had no connection with any terrorist groups either by sheltering or funding them and on their so called axis of evil was the least likely to be a threat which is why the shift in policy to saying they were there to save them from the evil regime!!Not only have all these innocent people been killed there are officially about 3 million who have been displaced at least half have fled abroad and the other half attempting to find somewhere safe in Iraq Syria says about 2 thousand Iraqis are crossing their borders daily to escape to safety but the most sick thing is not one person from the US or UK has said they re sorry or regret what they`ve done and then people call them insurgents and terrorists for retaliating in the only way they can it needs to stop now.

Answer 5

The most aggressive death count of Iraqi civilians is 43,000. By grossly overstating the number, you do a disservice to any anti-war people, because you damage any credibility they may have. As you are surely aware, of the estimated 40,000+ deaths among civilians, over 90% have died at the hands of Sunni/Shiite conflicts. Iraq is in the midst of a civil war.

Answer 6

World police? what an idea !! ?
I strongly agree to put both of them in charges of war crimes. They have no right to judge other countries just because of that stupid fake evidence.
I can't stand it when i see people dying in wars on TV news.
Blame it on UN, too.
Why Iraq? Why not Cuba or China?
Now new targets are Iran and N. Korea. what else both of them are going to do with these two countries?

People hate wars, just keep that in mind.

Answer 7

The invasion of Iraq in March 2003 by making use of U.S.-led campaign forces has been to blame for the dying of a minimum of 250,000 civilians (not which comprise particular of Iraq), shows a compilitation of scientific learn and corroborated eyewitness thoughts. maximum human beings of those deaths, that are as properly those generally envisioned from organic motives, ailment and injuries, have been between women human beings and childrens, records a properly-researched learn, that were released by making use of The Lancet scientific mag. The checklist in the British mag is predicated on the artwork of communities from the Johns Hopkins college and Columbia college in the U.S., and the Al-Mustansiriya college in Baghdad.

Answer 8

Ok would you have liked the 655,000 people to die in the US or Britian. Listen if is not one guy it will be another. This is just a prophecy being fulfilled. Bob Marley said it best when he states
"Until the philosphy which holds one rce inferior to another, until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes there will be war." War in the east, war in the west, war up north, war down south, war rumors of war....D

Answer 9

Yes that is true.
When 9/11 occured, the whole world goes on and on about it. When 7/7 occured, the same thing happened, people go on and on about it. But when over half a million iraqis died as a result of the US and UK, everyone keeps quiet. No wonder these people are getting so angry and taking it out on the US and UK.

Answer 10

They didn't want glory! Did you not know that Sadam was a threat to the US and other countries. They were just trying to help the Iraqi people. Unfortuantly, there are the bad over there that don't want the help that overshadows the people who do want help. Bad news always over rides any good news. I don't know, should I face homicide charges, because I crossed the street to help an elderly woman cross the road and in the midst I accidently killed an ant on the way over?