English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Thousands if not millions of innocent people in Iraq have been killed - has any body been brought forward to take responsibility for them? Take out the terrorists and kill them.
But in regards to the killings of innocent people/ non-combatants, does Blair and Bush not have blood on their hands? Are they above the international law? Slobodan Milosevic did similar and yet he was taken to the hague for war crimes.

2007-06-21 11:20:25 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

19 answers

Maybe one day they might be brought to book..

2007-06-21 11:23:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Blair and Bush have never deliberately targeted civilians.
Yes there have been civilian casualties during bombings etc: and unfortunate though they are, they were not intended.

The thousands of civilians deaths of which you speak are mainly perpetrated by the Iraqi's themselves assisted by Pakistan insurgents.

Milosevic deliberately ordered the execution of thousands so I am afraid your comparison is way off the mark.
The UK and USA do not have suicide bombers and terrorists within their armed services, your implication that the UK and USA are involved in these deaths is an insult to the professional and dedicated service personnel of both countries.

The problem we have is that people listen briefly to news headlines and hear that there has been another 25 killed in Irag today and then associate those deaths with the allied presence.
Please listen to the media intently, somewhere along the line they will state that the deaths were as a result of terrorist actions.

The majority of these terrorists don't give a dam who is trying to sort out the problems in Iraq, they are only interested in their own tribe/clan/organisation (call it what you will).
They are there for what they can get out of it and not the greater good of Iraq.

2007-06-21 23:15:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

You know reading what you have said is so true i wish other people had the guts to say what you have just said, it is true yes they do have blood on their hands and they should be brought before others for what they have done and are still doing! All they seem to whant to do is to control and prove they are the more dominant country maybe to prove to the other countries they are the stronger and united they will not be beeten, you are very right they don't have a thought for the innocents and the men who are made to go over there and fight and more important lose their life!

2007-06-22 09:57:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

High Standing Military Officer: "Sir we have found bodies of innocent people, women, children, families. When will you end this madness?"

Bush: "Leave us with this, we'll talk about it and get back to you."

Blair: "Wanna go fishing?"

Bush: "Yeah sure."

Do Bush and Blair have blood on their hands - Hell yes they do.

Everyone is just saying **** happens to innocent people being killed. If we could say that after the planes hit the tower, you wouldn't be over there right now and men and women wouldn't be bought home in body bags.

The initial view I'm getting from some people is:
Innocent American's are killed - Let's go to war.
Innocent Middle Eastern's Killed - **** Happens.

2007-06-21 11:35:30 · answer #4 · answered by plasmajosh 4 · 3 1

You are out of touch..Milosevic systematically had people killed on purpose..the civilians that are killed in Iraq are casualties of war...in any war there is always going to be civilian casualties..what makes this more complicated is you have the enemy hiding within the population and not wearing uniforms..not to mention women and children also are doing some fighting..it's great propaganda if a school full of children are killed because we tried to take out an artillery bunker nearby.

2007-06-21 11:32:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Saddam murdering thousands of his own people is called blood on his hands....

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

If you think that there was problem with going into Iraq, don't just blame Republicans...those above had their influence in Washington too.

2007-06-21 11:48:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonnnn24424 5 · 1 2

Not sure that 'millions' of people have died, but I do recall the war never got official UN backing, it could therefore be considered unlawful. It'll have to be someone with deeeeeep pockets to take that case through court though, so probably no-one will.

Popular feeling in the UK was this was not Blairs finest hour to be honest.

2007-06-21 12:07:37 · answer #7 · answered by cookiemonster_4_u 2 · 1 2

The invasion of Iraq was a misguided, misbegotten adventure, the brainchild of Bush and Blair. As a result, Iraq seems to be virtually in ruins, and Islamic terrorism has spread throughout the world putting more millions of people at risk. Thanks a bunch you war mongering pair.

2007-06-21 14:45:15 · answer #8 · answered by Beau Brummell 6 · 2 2

that's a discern of speech. somebody with Jewish blood on his palms is responsible for the deaths of Jews. you ought to declare George W. Bush has the blood of yankee squaddies and Iraqi civilians on his palms. no longer actually, for sure, yet his determination to deliver troops into Iraq has led to countless turmoil and the deaths of hundreds of hundreds of human beings.

2016-10-18 07:16:22 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

you obviously have no clue as to what Islamofaschists have in mind for anyone who does not agree with them, do you? Start reading history. These people want to take over the world. What they want is total world control. Did you ever see Star Trek with the "Borg"? They are kind of like them? Either you "assimilate" or you are made into slaves or killed. Period. End of discussion. You can't even begin to compare Pres. Bush and Prime Minister Blair to Milosovic. Pres. Bush is PROTECTING our nation from terrorists. Stop listening to far-left loonies (like Michael Moore and the like) and listen to some objective news organizations (like maybe News Max or Fox News and listen to some RATIONAL talk radio) and get de-programmed!

2007-06-21 11:30:21 · answer #10 · answered by drumrgrl56 1 · 3 4

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and all 535 members of the most arrogant, incompetent, wicked, greedy, contemptible, corrupt Republican-led Congress in U.S. history [who turned their backs while Bush violated our nation's laws] deserve to be tried in an international tribunal for high crimes against humanity, and - if convicted- should hang just as they conveniently arranged for Hussein to hang.
Surely Satan has reserved a special oil-soaked, blood-stained corner of Hell for these 538 cretins who so blatantly authorized the unconstitutional, illegal, unjustified and immoral invasion of another sovereign country that in no way threatened, provoked or attacked the U.S.A.
From its first day in office, the Bush administration wanted to attack Iraq for three 'lame' reasons:
1) The Bush family had a personal vendetta against Hussein since the days of Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was criticized, ridiculed and humiliated for 'not finishing the job' and using Hussein at that time;
2) Cheney and his oil cronies want all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands so they can get richer and richer and richer feeding America's addiction to cheap, easily-accessible foreign OIL instead of developing cheaper (and less profitable) alternative fuels of forcing auto manufacturers to build more fuel-efficient vehicles;
3) Ever since World War II, the giant U.S. military-industrial complex realized how profitable 'war' could be, so it bought up all the politicians; hired pricey lobbyists and formed special interest groups to encourage and promote more 'war'. Thus, we were involved in the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam and Desert Storm all so government contractors such as McDonnell-Douglass, Sikorsky and Lockheed-Martin could make BILLIONS of dollars in profits. A new 'war' was necessary to boost their sagging profits, AND to bring two newcomers to the government trough: the Carlyle Group and Halliburton, both of which have direct ties to the Bush-Cheney White House.
Don't kid yourself: this 'war' has been all about OIL and WAR PROFITEERING since its very first day. Yes, Bush and all of his greedhead associates who went along with such insanity have blood on their hands. Yes, they should all be held accountable for the deaths of 675,000 Iraqis and 3,500 U.S. soldiers (so far). Yes, they all should have their oil-drenched hearts cut out with the daggers of the very 'terrorist groups' whom they're so paranoid about, and who gave them the perfect emotional excuse to attack Iraq for no justifiable reason. -RKO- 06/21/07

2007-06-21 12:35:44 · answer #11 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers