by Beans 17 Replies latest social current
I was watching CNN when I was in Mexico and they had a very interesting question to the viewers so I was wondering what your answer would be?
Since no weapons of mass destruction have not been found should Blair and Bush be tried in a world court for the actions and be held responsible for all the killing?
Beans
Canadian District Overbeer
Hi Beans,
Would be an interestin thing. AFAIK US army has the task to free the president even from International Courts...
Since no weapons of mass destruction have not been found should Blair and Bush be tried in a world court for the actions and be held responsible for all the killing
That's enough reason for them not to be tried. If it's true, that is.
Considering that fact that chemical weapons have indeed been found a few days ago, I guess CNN will now have to revise their question. Perhaps they could change it to: should Blair and Bush be tried in a world court for the actions and be held responsible for all the killing if no additional weapons are found?
Here's how it worked kids, trust me on this...it will be proven true eventially. Saddam used water trucks to transport his chems into Syria, then filled the empty water trucks with Jet fuel and diesel fuel..when they were found empty...they tested positive for the jet fuel/diesel. (this is coming from the son of Syria's defense minister). That's why we had some "finds" that initially tested positive for nerve agent...but later for Rocket Fuel (I'm talking about the missles and rockets found shortly after the war.
Here's the next question....if it becomes clear that Saddam shipped his WMD to Syria with the help of Russia, should the leaders of both these countries be tried in a "World Court"? No...because the WC wouldn't try them for this.
If it becomes clear that Russia and France were supplying weapons to Saddam until just weeks prior to the war...should they be drug before a WC (it's already established that france was). Saddam was in violation of a ceasefire that he signed WITH THE UNITED STATES...that in and of itself justified the war.
Saddam was in violation of a ceasefire that he signed WITH THE UNITED STATES...that in and of itself justified the war.
EXACTLY! It's really interesting how short some people's memories are. The Iraqi war was just a continuation of the Gulf War of 1991 because Saddam violated (numerous times) the CEASEFIRE (not treaty) of the original conflict. It was totally Saddam's choice.... either live up to your agreement when you cried "Uncle" twelve years previously or risk a continuation of hostilities... which by the way he started by invading Kuwait.
And anyway Saddam did use WMD on the Kurds -- so the question is irrelevant
They just found some old buried chemical warheads..... the fact is that Saddam did use them in the past. There is no denying that fact.
And anyway Saddam did use WMD on the Kurds -- so the question is irrelevant
Uhhh that was like 13- 14 years ago so it is relevent. The question is about WMDs in the present. (Hard tangible evidence that would be provable in a world court of which I would welcome but by all accounts has yet to surface. Not anecdotal, but concrete.) LC
