Tony Blair.

Ye, I find it a bit wierd.
Media kept saying we have to go to war so finally decided ye we will go to war. Then they say cause we didnt find weapons of mass destruction just materials to build em that the war was pointless and tony blair and bush killed all them innocent people.

When u think in comparison to the people sadam killed over the years its nothing. And now TB isnt PM no more isnt he head of the war or w.e? Seems wierd that he went straight into that position.

Meh i dont know and dc :P discuss or w.e

The media chooses which "stories" will get the most views on television or sell the most papers

That's how politics work, you make a scapegoat and claim to be against it to make people like you. The current scapegoat is immigrants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 088!

Ye, I find it a bit wierd.
Media kept saying we have to go to war so finally decided ye we will go to war. Then they say cause we didnt find weapons of mass destruction just materials to build em that the war was pointless and tony blair and bush killed all them innocent people.

When u think in comparison to the people sadam killed over the years its nothing. And now TB isnt PM no more isnt he head of the war or w.e? Seems wierd that he went straight into that position.

Meh i dont know and dc :P discuss or w.e

---

Hussein and Blair are totally different.

Saddam Hussein crushed uprisings which threatend Iraq's stability, whereas Tony Blair lied about WMD as an excuse to go into an illegal war for oil. The media never said we had to go to war, infact a lot of them where against it. Iraq was no threat to the west at all.

Quote:

---

That's how politics work, you make a scapegoat and claim to be against it to make people like you. The current scapegoat is immigrants.

---

The reason immigration is an important issue is because-;

• A fair majority of the immigrants don't work.
• A fair slice of them commit crime.
• We have no control over our borders anymore.
• The majority of British people want limited immigration.
• Immigration is driving down lower class wages.
• Education and other public services are struggling to cope.
• We don't know how many people are in the country.
• A report was recently published stating that we don't benefit from immigration - thus proving the government wrong on what they have been saying for years.

Innocent people always die because of war.
They havent died because of the british. One of the rules was not to fire until fired upon, so if any civi's have been killed its because of people who are from iraq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corporal

Innocent people always die because of war.
They havent died because of the british. One of the rules was not to fire until fired upon, so if any civi's have been killed its because of people who are from iraq.

---

Some Iraqi's fought to defend their sovereign country from invasion, I would of fought if I was an Iraqi in 2003. All of the Iraqi's were innocent, Al Qaeda had no connection with Iraq at all. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Some Iraqi's fought to defend their sovereign country from invasion, I would of fought if I was an Iraqi in 2003. All of the Iraqi's were innocent, Al Qaeda had no connection with Iraq at all. :)

---

wth:s where did i say they did?
Im on about whats going on now sorry, but yer i agree with you there. But we've removed a man the earth which i think is good.
If it was the right way of removing him is a diffrent qustion:P
but at the end of the day its rare for everyone to support a war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corporal

wth:s where did i say they did?
Im on about whats going on now sorry, but yer i agree with you there. But we've removed a man the earth which i think is good.
If it was the right way of removing him is a diffrent qustion:P
but at the end of the day its rare for everyone to support a war.

---

I was replying to it in general, I prefer it like that. :P

Saddam Hussein gave the Iraqi's more freedom, security, food, water and electric supplies than they had ever had before and even do now in 2008. Iraq is a thousand times worse off than it was under Saddam. The question of removing him, well I think you have to analyse the situation. Compated with other Middle Eatern countries Saddam was gentle. He abolished Shria courts & allowed women to have top jobs, he also gave them the chice to dress in western style clothing. :) - Adding on from my previous replies in reply to the thread starter, Iraq didn't have the capability nor the sufficent quality to make any Nuclear/Chemical/Biological weapons, if Saddam Hussein and the Ba'ath regime had the possesion of any of these they would of been deployed in the battle/occupation. Iraq had nothing to hide, if it did it wouldn't of let the UN weapons inspectors in.

Was/Did Iraq..

• Near civil collapse? - no.
• Low food/water supplies? - no.
• Terrorism state? -no.
• Bad state services? (such as roads, education, health) - no.

You say that but wasnt hussein or w.e given something like 20 years to prove he didnt have weapons or materials to build them and he never gave proof?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 088!

You say that but wasnt hussein or w.e given something like 20 years to prove he didnt have weapons or materials to build them and he never gave proof?

---

Well he had nothing to prove anyway, he had no dangerous weapon's, none where ever found by the UN and none where ever found during the Gulf Wars.

But they found materials to build them.

the whole thing was wrng, Irag never had weapons it was an excuse to go in and invade. and it was the americans idea, britain just trying to please Bush and them by following them in

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 088!

You say that but wasnt hussein or w.e given something like 20 years to prove he didnt have weapons or materials to build them and he never gave proof?

---

The only thing they found was depleted uranium, stuff that is useless. You are looking for excuses to find a reason to justify the war - nothing can justify it. If we were to go around the world destroying countries that we thought/do have WMD then the Republic of China would be destroyed, Iran would be destroyed, Russian Federation would be destroyed, France would be destroyed, so would us and the USA including others such as India & Pakistan.

Quote:

---

Well he had nothing to prove anyway, he had no dangerous weapon's, none where ever found by the UN and none where ever found during the Gulf Wars.

---

100% right as usual. :)

As the thread is about Blair I'm just going to say that I do believe that he truly though there were WMDs in Iraq, he has since apologised and said that he was wrong but that he acted on what information was given to him, and I respect him greatly for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

As the thread is about Blair I'm just going to say that I do believe that he truly though there were WMDs in Iraq, he has since apologised and said that he was wrong but that he acted on what information was given to him, and I respect him greatly for that.

---

He still claims it was the right decision.

Immigrants need to stop taking all our jobs as they work so cheaply, and trying to make England like the holes they came from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

As the thread is about Blair I'm just going to say that I do believe that he truly though there were WMDs in Iraq, he has since apologised and said that he was wrong but that he acted on what information was given to him, and I respect him greatly for that.

---

Does that mean that everyone in the world is right because they follow their heart? He may well of thought they had WMDs but he needed to look at the facts, the UN found nothing, he posed no threat or interest in the West. Blair just took in a load of American propaganda and then truly thought it was right. If he wasn't seduced into all that he could of seen the facts and then realised there was no evidence suggesting Iraq had WMD.

It's like me saying, I have a gut feeling the Chinese Olympics will be a complete disaster so there's no point sending any athletes :S - I don't have much evidence the Olympics will be a disaster and I don't know they will be, but I have the feeling they will be, that does not justify not sending athletes.