RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch

RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kdsub -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:39:43 PM)
Take some time to find out who supplied the Soviet army with arms...food and oil. Then tell me again they could have fought off Germany without our aid. HERE is a sample of what we did for Russia...lots of links I could give you... They did not have a chance of pushing Germans from their soil with out us. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:42:18 PM)
We have side tracked this thread enough... The above is my last comment on our sidebar...Perhaps another thread sometime. Butch

cuckoldmepls -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:44:42 PM)
Bush had Congressional approval for his military actions, but Obama does not. the War Powers Act only allows him to intervene miiltarily for a maximum of 90 days without Congressional approval. The only reason he has not been impeached over this is because the democrats still control the Senate. Hopefully that will change.

mnottertail -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:45:05 PM)
When Stalin approached first Britain and then the US for help in stopping the Nazis from about 36 on he was given a cold shoulder by both. So, he made a pact with Hitler so they would head more West than was their ultimate desire. That bought him some time. We, as usual pitched in pretty late.

mnottertail -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:53:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls Bush had Congressional approval for his military actions, but Obama does not. the War Powers Act only allows him to intervene miiltarily for a maximum of 90 days without Congressional approval. The only reason he has not been impeached over this is because the democrats still control the Senate. Hopefully that will change. Uh, thanks for the astute survey of the law Perry Mason. You can wish it, but that is about as wrong as it gets on all counts. Your grammar is good though. Just happens to be whole cloth and total bullshit.

kdsub -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 1:59:47 PM)
Yep but we made the difference when we came...we did not want to get involved in foreign wars...We were not looking to dominate the world either politically of militarily as some fanatics here seem to think...That is why it toke us so long to get involved... but even then only a few years... NOW... if we would only mind our own business today. Butch

FirstQuaker -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 2:42:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Arpig, perhaps it was my fault. Perhaps the OP should have specified Tony Blair, John Howard and all the other Prime Ministers who dragged their countries into the Iraq fiasco. I should have thought of it at the time but didn't. There was no intention to single out the US on my part - that was just the way the HRW Report set things up. If one of those other countries succeeded in prosecuting their PM responsible for participation in Iraq II, would that strengthen the chances of US investigations/prosecution? I'd dearly love to see Howard, the then Australian PM charged with war crimes and having to justify his decisions to a court of law. I should add that Howard's reasons would include the political imperative upon Australia to contribute to the Australian-US security alliance ie. Australia was following the US lead. One clear implication of this is that, at a very sigificant level, Australian participation had nothing to do with the situation in Iraq per se, the critical factor was the state of the Australia-US alliance. The more interesting thing is who has been doing what since then, among this cast of worthies. Tony Blair, after destroying thier economy while lying the British into a war they were unprepared for and could not afford, (topping the list of his myriad of sins,) has been raking in millions selling out the scarred remains of the Iraqi oil fields output to non-British oil interests, while flying around seeking a mandarin's position in the 4th Reich's top tier, when not partying it up with the rich and famous on his estate in Barbados.. Bush the Younger has been in exile in Texas, with even his own party distancing themselves from him. Nobody wants particularly to talk to him, and nobody is pounding at his door with any sort of job offers in hand. You are probably a better source for what Howard has been up to since his 'retirement' but it looks like he is still active politically running an international league of Tories, and even is a speaker on the same circuit as Blair. Sorry I haven't spent the time to fully look at Howard. Anyway of the lot, Blair seems to be living the highest off the Iraqi war hog. Much as you would in any other 'criminal' investigation, if you 'follow the money' it surely seems to be ending up on Tony Blair's doorstep.

Politesub53 -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 4:31:20 PM)
I think Blairs involvement in the lies about WMD`s will scupper any chances of the top Euro job that he is after. Here are just some of Blairs known enterprises. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259030/Tony-Blairs-secret-dealings-South-Korean-oil-firm-UI-Energy-Corp.html

Politesub53 -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 5:13:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub What an idiot link...you gave me Germany's reasons for war not ours....Why do you think American shipping was attacked?...Will because we were keeping you afloat in your war supplying materials...We were helping your country...The American people did not want to get into your war... But we decided to help your country from an aggressor. Germany was not going to invade the United States... We would have had no shipping attacked if we were not supplying war goods. The letter to the Mexican government was bullshit and only used as propaganda by Wilson because he thought we should help.....Your country. Ah I see, because it was president Wilson then it was bullshit (Your word) and my link is invalid. As for the other link, it showed Germany had declared war on America, any foll, except you, can see that would make you....At war. quote: The point is you did not do it and we saved your butts...because you were our ally… our friends…not for our benefit…It would have been wiser to let Hitler expend his army trying to defeat you while we gought Japan with our full might. Again try reading up on it. America saw hitler as the main longterm threat. As for saving our butts, yep you were right here during the first two years. quote: We paid France...now pay us..hey imagine how long 400 billion would pay for our health plan. Check a few facts, Britain was owed more from other nations than it owed to America was at the end of WW1. quote: I appreciate your brave men and women that lost their lives fighting along side of our forces... I feel for them because the lack of will of your government and people to see the war through is a cowardly disgrace and they may have wasted their lives. Butch Utter bollocks, like the rest of your post. Firstly, we are still there. Secondly America and the UK have an almost similar timetable. Thirdly our citizens have been right behind our troops. I guess you made the remark "cowardly disgrace" so your last remark didnt make you look like a prick. How wrong you were.

FirstQuaker -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 5:15:02 PM)
I think he is getting himself put up for some of those cushy EU and international organizational jobs more for his own self esteem then for any monetary needs., kinda like giving himself a peerage. Most he ones I have seen him named for so far are actually little better then "stuffed shirts" who know their roles when the real powers tell them what to do. But I see the Daily Mail hasn't missed much about the man's activities,and certainly appears to see them in the same light I do. That war in Iraq surely was a financial goldmine easily equaling wining the national lottery for the Blair household. And they have been buying up ritzy offshore houses and estates, (I think the one in the Barbados party zone for the international elite, was the 4th or 5th such.) and only an utter rube would think the man is bringing all his ill gotten gains home to the UK and handing a nice cut off to the Revenue Service . . .

Politesub53 -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 5:25:18 PM)
To be honest I dont think money was Blairs motive for Iraq. I think it was a mixture of his religious beliefs and his desire to leave his mark on history. He will be remembered but not for the reasons he wishes. Peerages are common for most top politicians, kind of a perk at the taxpayers expense. This is hypocrisy given labours rush to cut hereditary Peers. We now have the dubious sight of that great champion of the unions, Lord Prescott, swanning around town. Our security services told Blair that there was no evidence of WMD`s but Blair and Bush had decided to press ahead by then, evidence or not.The Iraq inquiry is due to end this year so the findings may be illuminating.

FirstQuaker -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 5:35:21 PM)
I have to agree it likely was not his conscious motive, (for what normal man could look himself in the mirror if that was the case, even a psychopath would tell himself he had noble motives) but considering how he profited off the affair, I find it hard to believe that so much wealth conveniently fell out of the sky on top of him, without his having some desire and making some long term effort for it to do so.

tweakabelle -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 7:03:25 PM)
Let's not forget Blair is still pretending to be a statesman. He has been given a token role in the Middle East 'peace process' as front man for the Quartet (EU UN US & Russia). His task was to facilitate the peace process between the Izzys and the Pals. As we all know, the peace process has gone backwards at a rate of knots. Palestinians in particular have frequently complained about Blair's pro-Israel bias. Seems like Blessed Tony has lost none of his touch ... or his ego FQ, Howard has been keeping a pretty low profile since his humiliating defeat (he lost his parliamentary seat as well as government) a few years ago. Bar his diehard loyalists, virtually no one has missed him. He seems singularly suited to obscurity IMHO.

FirstQuaker -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 7:27:57 PM)
Yes, there is that dictomy in the thing, the supposedly fire breathing "right" wing leaders of this sit in exile and are dwindling into obscurity while the supposed "left' wing duped follower and rube from the UK dances off into the tropical sunset, puling a groaning and increasingly weighty wagon load of money and fame behind him. In the normal world, the leaders get the loot and the peasants go back to the farm. Perhaps Blair was more of the real mover and shaker of this thing, then he was of the poodle.

kdsub -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 9:21:17 PM)
quote: Check a few facts, Britain was owed more from other nations than it owed to America was at the end of WW1 What difference does that make...other nations owe us as well... like you and half the damn civilized world. Your country defaulted on a loan ....so much for British honor and integrity. Hey just admit it… not your fault…well only a little…Soon the US could also default on its loans and I will have to eat crow… At least I will hold up to it…unlike yourself. Butch

Termyn8or -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 10:28:23 PM)
Nevermind.

Termyn8or -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 10:30:49 PM)
Also nevermind. Japan was Germany's ally. We pissed Japan off. How, and more importantly WHY did we piss Japan off ? I am simply amazed that people think a military leader like Hitler who almost got most of Europe would be stupid enough in that day and age to try to hold his winnings and still attempt another front halfway around the world. That would assume that he was as stupid as Bush. What's more by the time the US got into WW2, Germany was already stretched like a gnat's ass over a 55 gallon drum. Where were we during the first blitzkreig ? We were still trying to recover from a depression almost as bad as this one's going to be. We should've minded our own business. If we hadn't pissed Japan off and just stayed out of it, all parties involved would have been quite weakened. Russia got most of the good countries anyway, and if they would've had to handle the situation themselves there would never have been a cold war. It broke them and it broke us, only the results came in later. The only downside would be the possibility that all parties unified under Russia or Germany, with the scientists we stole, would eventually mount up enough force to actually attack us, but much later. I am in doubt as to whether they actually thought of that as a serious possibility or if they were dumb like today's US politicians. T^T

tweakabelle -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 10:40:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker Yes, there is that dictomy in the thing, the supposedly fire breathing "right" wing leaders of this sit in exile and are dwindling into obscurity while the supposed "left' wing duped follower and rube from the UK dances off into the tropical sunset, puling a groaning and increasingly weighty wagon load of money and fame behind him. In the normal world, the leaders get the loot and the peasants go back to the farm. Perhaps Blair was more of the real mover and shaker of this thing, then he was of the poodle. There might be a few difficulties with that suggestion. The origins of Iraq II are usually treced back to the neo-con/Zionist circle that included such types as Rumsfeld, Perle, Firth, Wolfowitz, Cheney et al during the Clinton era. Their promotion of a second Iraqi war can be traced back to the mid-90s at least. Bush the Dumber's election victory (?) in 2000 enabled the transition from mad cap theory to political and military fact. As we all know, 9/11 was manipulated to seal the deal. Blessed Tony seems to have arrived on the scene a bit later. Most accounts I've encountered date Blessed Tony's involvement as subsequent to an agreement arrived at with GWB at (I seem to recall) Camp David post 9/11. It can't be denied that outside of the US, he was chief cheer leader and a most impassioned advocate. My feeling at the time was Blessed Tony was trying to carve out a role a broker between an angry aggressive US and an EU that ranged from sceptical to hostile. Perhaps in private moments he saw himself as the glue holding the Western alliance together, enabling its inevitable triumph .... or some such self serving gibberish. Deluded - definitely. Vainglorious - undoubtedly. But it does seem a bit of a stretch to cast him as a primary instigator or war-monger-in-chief. OTOH Howard couldn't complain about being assigned the role of poodle. He's on the record as stating Australian involvement was primarily to preserve/strengthen the security alliance with the US. He has a lifelong record of ingratiating himself unapologetically with the centres of Western power.

MrRodgers -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/14/2011 10:49:16 PM)
Aside from the fact that WE arraigned an Iraqi court to try and hang Saddam, the court of world opinion has already made its judgment...that US legal values are no different and sometimes less than many other countries when it comes to its geopolitical interests. There really is no such thing anymore in the US or the entire west as...due process of law. Orwellian-like, we just change the words and magically...it all becomes something else. Recall, everything Hitler did...was legal. Why can't people see the writing on the wall ? The obvious...obvious fucking fact is that few seem to want to recognize it. One becomes tired of that sick feeling in their stomach and go into denial. The very profitable cold war was over. The western societies were expecting a so-called peace-dividend. Those who were, were badly mistaken as of course...we needed a new enemy, we needed new fear, we had to...had to have yet another attack, another enemy. Presto...9/11 and we are off and running. A brand new enemy...the terrorist and a brand new war...the 'War on Terror.' And this isn't just any war...no. This war is the best kind, very, very, very profitable war...a war on a tactic. Can you beat that ? No !! A war against no factual discernible enemy that may not even exist anywhere near what you are told and beautifully to...last forever. Let the 'cashish' roll in baby. Now we are really mak'n some fuck'n money.

FirstQuaker -> RE: Arrest Bush II for War Crimes - Human Rights Watch (7/15/2011 12:23:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle There might be a few difficulties with that suggestion. The origins of Iraq II are usually treced back to the neo-con/Zionist circle that included such types as Rumsfeld, Perle, Firth, Wolfowitz, Cheney et al during the Clinton era. Their promotion of a second Iraqi war can be traced back to the mid-90s at least. Bush the Dumber's election victory (?) in 2000 enabled the transition from mad cap theory to political and military fact. As we all know, 9/11 was manipulated to seal the deal. Blessed Tony seems to have arrived on the scene a bit later. Most accounts I've encountered date Blessed Tony's involvement as subsequent to an agreement arrived at with GWB at (I seem to recall) Camp David post 9/11. It can't be denied that outside of the US, he was chief cheer leader and a most impassioned advocate. My feeling at the time was Blessed Tony was trying to carve out a role a broker between an angry aggressive US and an EU that ranged from sceptical to hostile. Perhaps in private moments he saw himself as the glue holding the Western alliance together, enabling its inevitable triumph .... or some such self serving gibberish. Deluded - definitely. Vainglorious - undoubtedly. But it does seem a bit of a stretch to cast him as a primary instigator or war-monger-in-chief. OTOH Howard couldn't complain about being assigned the role of poodle. He's on the record as stating Australian involvement was primarily to preserve/strengthen the security alliance with the US. He has a lifelong record of ingratiating himself unapologetically with the centres of Western power. Well, the roots of regime change in Iraq can be traced back a bit farther then the mid 90's and the neocons. The ruling class across the Anglosphere and among the regional monarchs in the Middle East was never really happy with the Pan-Arab Baathist party taking the British installed royal cousins out and killing them, and installing the rule of the Islamic proletariat in Iraq. With the Soviets supporting Iraq, there was not much to be done about it for some time. As for Blair, perhaps that was his real role, to play a "left wing" England, endangered and ready to fight this Iraqi madman, on the world stage, and thus sell the deal in places the Bush United States could not.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.265625