Should Tony Blair Be Charged With War Crimes?

Britain's war on Iraq was illegal. It broke international law, a law that Tony Blair was quite happy to accept and SIGN his name to adhere to. America refused to recognise this law so they still have their legs to stand on. Tony Blair does not. I believe that Tony Blair should be charged with war crimes and handed over to the Iraqis for execution.

skunkushybrid said:

Britain's war on Iraq was illegal. It broke international law, a law that Tony Blair was quite happy to accept and SIGN his name to adhere to. America refused to recognise this law so they still have their legs to stand on. Tony Blair does not. I believe that Tony Blair should be charged with war crimes and handed over to the Iraqis for execution.

Click to expand...

I don't think hypocracy should be punished any more in this particular case. Blair deserves to be charged, Bush deserves to be shot; in the back; by an Iraqi. Regardelss of the treaty they were both in the wrong.
But look at the numbers of US soldiers out there in comparisson to UK soldiers, let's look at this from a realistic point of view, not on principles.

Bear in mind, however, this was not technically a war in legal terms.

Yes med' there was a deal. Also, I just think Tony didn't have the balls to say no.

Can someone point out the law that Bush and Blair broke? Link anyone?

Vi

ViRedd said:

Can someone point out the law that Bush and Blair broke? Link anyone?

Vi

Click to expand...

Blair is being threatened heavily with war-crimes here... But they broke no rules because it was not a war. It was a coalition. Therefore, TECHNICALLY, it was perfectly legal, and so your question is irrelevent anyway.

shoot tony in one of his knees and put him back to work..

take bush back to the meatpacking plant and make sloppy joes for all i care.

just do like the mob would do... make sure everybody in the family has food on their plate 3 times a day and shoot that degenerate gamblimg fool in law your sister marriedthen say he went for a drive to the store.

i didnt see nutin officer.

I think this is a perfect example of the lack of effectiveness of the US government. Bush can go to war with no motive when he wants, and not be held responsible. THAT IS NOT A DEMOCRACY.

ViRedd said:

Can someone point out the law that Bush and Blair broke? Link anyone?

Vi

Click to expand...

Bush hasn't broke the law as America fail to recognise it. It is an International law that Blair has signed to adhere to. Sorry Vi', no link... but I'm sure if you type... bbc, Tony Blair, War Crimes you should get something. I can't guarantee it as I haven't tried it, but it should work.

I notice that a technicality has been used in this thread... maybe I should start another. Who believes the WAR on Iraq was a war?

My question is irrelevant, yet the bbc made a whole programme dedicated to this very subject. Tony Blair told the people of this country that saddam had womd, a lie, then set about murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent people within the guise of WAR. His war crimes are real, he should stand trial.

So, no law was broken, and yet ... you guyz would execute the leaders of two major countries for what ... not agreeing with your politics?

And, why in the world did Tony Blair sign on to an International Law? Doesn't that mean that every citizen standing under the shadow of the Union Jack would have to answer to international law as well? I thought the Brits were a free people. <Sheesh!>

All Bush, or any U.S. president has to do is to present his case to the Congress and the Congress votes to go to war. Oh, and by the way ... all but three congressmen voted in favor of the Iraqi war. Even John Kerry voted for it before he voted against it. *lol*


Vi

ViRedd said:

So, no law was broken, and yet ... you guyz would execute the leaders of two major countries for what ... not agreeing with your politics?

And, why in the world did Tony Blair sign on to an International Law? Doesn't that mean that every citizen standing under the shadow of the Union Jack would have to answer to international law as well? I thought the Brits were a free people. <Sheesh!>

All Bush, or any U.S. president has to do is to present his case to the Congress and the Congress votes to go to war. Oh, and by the way ... all but three congressmen voted in favor of the Iraqi war. Even John Kerry voted for it before he voted against it. *lol*


Vi

Click to expand...

Vi, that's irrelevant. The workings of government ensure Bush will not be blamed for a massive mistake. That's why he went to war in the first place. Yes, ok, neither will be charged. Congress' decline of the sending in of more troops shows that there has been a massive change in favour of a liberal stance. Why are you arguing against such an obvious point?

Its not a question of agreeing with my politics. Bush made a massive mistake, even you have to admit that...And for this he must be held accountable. THAT IS HOW A DEMOCRACY WORKS. Are you delusional?

And Vi....He signed on to an international law regarding war...

Anyway assuming we were all subject to this, it sustains my underlining argument that one man should not make decisions on behalf of the population. There should be MANY more referendums. Something which seems rather odd to most Americans.

Your hubris of the defeated is shining through at last.

^^^
The true hubris is displayed by those who rush to defeat......perchance wishful thinking also oisin?
Ostriches could not hide any better than you defeatists

Wavels said:

^^^
The true hubris is displayed by those who rush to defeat......perchance wishful thinking also oisin?
Ostriches could not hide any better than you defeatists

Click to expand...

What exactly are you accusing me of??

Oh the war on terror is over? Interesting....
Seems to me you eagerly embrace defeat...

If you people over in England are unhappy that Blair backed Bush, I would trade Blair for Bush.

Wavels said:

Oh the war on terror is over? Interesting....
Seems to me you eagerly embrace defeat...

Click to expand...

Ah, ok I see.

Your missing one crucial piece of information. Who was the terrorist? we have been defeated in our morals. What we have done is disgraceful and very, very damaging. Look at Germany, it still contains half of the US army, and is a far supirior country to America. It is arrogance and insecurity displayed by countries who think they are right, and that my friend, is defeat.

*edit - Also why would there be threats of war crimes if it wasn't a mistake in most people's eyes?

Wow, your exaggerated self confidence is rife with delusional thinking....
Germany superior.....In what regard specifically?
Yup, great economy, social welfare collapse imminent....yikes!

Wavels said:

Wow, your exaggerated self confidence is rife with delusional thinking....
Germany superior.....In what regard specifically?
Yup, great economy, social welfare collapse imminent....yikes!

Click to expand...

These days a country's success is based on their economy and debt, do not deny that. Germany has withstood one of the worst eras known to man and still come out tops. It managed to change it's entire stance in a single generation, which is much more than America can say.

Holy Moly, you're serious....

Which country is more productive, which economy is stronger, and faster growing?....like I said, wishful thinking, oisin.

Wavels said:

Holy Moly, you're serious....

Which country is more productive, which economy is stronger, and faster growing?....like I said, wishful thinking, oisin.

Click to expand...

The European Union outperforms the US is almost every catagory...I don't see the logistics of your argument. There is no wishful thinking about it, America is and has been in a state since the white man decided to invade. You are a developed country which is dominated by organised religion, allows brutal executions as punishment for crimes, and hasn't EVER had a black or female president. What are you talking about? There is very little dignity left in your country. Each individual has as few rights as the Turkish. Every inch you step is monitored, websites undermining Bush are banned. Just the other day I had to post an entire article about the DEA invading 11 medical marijuana clinics because your American's aren't allowed to see what is going on in your own country... Do you call this a liberal state? A country which prides itself on the freedom of speech? Re-think your non-existent argument and report back. Thanks.