Is Tony Blair a war criminal?

[Alex 30721]

I've had a good read through this now....I think Blair and Campbell have lied to themselves more than they lied to the British people on this. They've lied to themselves about the evidence to go to war so much that it has become "their truth". So they can go into press conferences yesterday and blatantly claim not to have mislead us because that's the very thing they've convinced themselves of.

 

Chilcott rejects the evidence out of hand, he says there was no need to invade as Saddam wasn't a threat and he also says the UK goverment should've tested the evidence more before putting it to Parliament. I'm not a lawyer but I think given the "honest guv, that is wot we fort" defence that Blair is taking, it makes a war crime difficult to prove. Which Blair, as a very clever advocate himself, probably knew all along. I think we'll have to accept that the report blatantly rinses him on every single aspect of the invasion, and that he's responsible for the deaths of 176 UK service men and women, also the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed in the subsequent sectarian war that followed which Chilcott plainly states he was fully informed about and was aware of pre invasion. But he didn't lie....to us anyway...that much...

I've thought the same about Blair and Campbell for a while now. You'll remember Campbell's interview on the Andrew Marr show where he did his tearful defence of himself and Blair.

[Ayatollah Hermione 12866]

BTW, shouldn't the US have an equivalent enquiry?

They're too busy trying to kill every black person in the country

[Happy Face 29]

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/07/chilcot-report-and-77-london-bombing-anniversary-converge-to-highlight-terrorisms-causes/

 

Worth reading. On the evidence that terrorism is further fueled by our militarism. How this is widely accepted within the leadership of aggressive western nations and was well known and recognised prior to ramping up aggression post 9/11, specifically by Blair himself.

[Rayvin 4964]

But I thought that the West was in no way responsible for rise of Islamism, and that saying anything to the contrary made you a terrorist sympathiser?

[Renton 17992]

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/07/chilcot-report-and-77-london-bombing-anniversary-converge-to-highlight-terrorisms-causes/

 

Worth reading. On the evidence that terrorism is further fueled by our militarism. How this is widely accepted within the leadership of aggressive western nations and was well known and recognised prior to ramping up aggression post 9/11, specifically by Blair himself.

I don't think that article offered any evidence of that at all, although of course there's going to be an association. It's quite simple to me. What motivates these people? Killing yourself in a suicide attack is primarily a religious action, rather than a political one. Wouldn't you agree? It's about reward in the after life? Therefore the primary cause is religious, that's the underlying cause. It's not like they have an achievable political objective, is it?

 

Blair's role in the Iraq War was reprehensible and his attitude still is imo. But to blame the home grown terrorism of 7/7 on him (and countless thwarted acts)? No, I'm not accepting that. That is the fault of the terrorists and nobody else.

Edited July 7, 2016 by Renton

[Happy Face 29]

I doubt we will find any more common ground on this. Just to respond on your view that a suicide attack is a primarily religious act, I don't think you could be further from the truth. From WW2 kamikazes to the Tamil tigers, suicide attacks have most often been secular, politically motivated choices.

 

Most religions view suicide negatively, Islam especially views it as one of the greatest sins.

 

Most suicide bombers are currently Muslim, but saying their religion motivates their attacks is as facile as claiming that because most murders are committed by men so being a man is the primary cause of bring a murderer.

 

This MIT study from 2006 is an interesting read on the subject

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/argo_audit_4.06.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjRnNm_g-LNAhULCcAKHVnxBpkQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNHn-jzfc2txbUqm-8oc8uSHAPGssw&sig2=z4CZK6hl0mD3jCmBUboQMw

[Renton 17992]

I doubt we will find any more common ground on this. Just to respond on your view that a suicide attack is a primarily religious act, I don't think you could be further from the truth. From WW2 kamikazes to the Tamil tigers, suicide attacks have most often been secular, politically motivated choices.

 

Most religions view suicide negatively, Islam especially views it as one of the greatest sins.

 

Most suicide bombers are currently Muslim, but saying their religion motivates their attacks is as facile as claiming that because most murders are committed by men so being a man is the primary cause of bring a murderer.

 

This MIT study from 2006 is an interesting read on the subject

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/argo_audit_4.06.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjRnNm_g-LNAhULCcAKHVnxBpkQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNHn-jzfc2txbUqm-8oc8uSHAPGssw&sig2=z4CZK6hl0mD3jCmBUboQMw

I'll read that study later, but agreed, we're never going to agree on this. Were the 7/7 bombers even of Iraqi decent? No, I don't think they were. They acted out of jihad in response to their murdered muslim "brothers". Yes, there were geopolitical issues, but how many Christians kill themselves in response to Christians getting killed in a foreign country? Howay man.

 

BTW, didn't the kami kazis regard their emperor as a God? Weren't they the "divine" wind? Very few people end their lives purely for political gain, it's a daily occurrence in the ME and beyond now.

[Dr Gloom 20045]

Of course an Islamist suicide bombing is a primarily religious act. They do it for the all the virgins they'll have waiting for them in the afterlife

[Happy Face 29]

Of course an Islamist suicide bombing is a primarily religious act. They do it for the all the virgins they'll have waiting for them in the afterlife

Genuinely interested in any credible source you have for that justification in significant numbers.

 

The Quran says that all devout Muslim males, not only martyrs, will be rewarded with 72 virgins. Women get one man. If you don't need to kill anyone, let alone yourself, to qualify, then it seems unlikely it would be anyones primary motivation.

[Renton 17992]

Genuinely interested in any credible source you have for that justification in significant numbers.

 

The Quran says that all devout Muslim males, not only martyrs, will be rewarded with 72 virgins. Women get one man. If you don't need to kill anyone, let alone yourself, to qualify, then it seems unlikely it would be anyones primary motivation.

Because giving your life for your religion is the ultimate devotion. Honestly HF, it's surely beyond contention that suicide bombers, human bombers, whatever you call them are religiously motivated. You say I'm being facile stating this, well I think it's unbelievable you're denying it.

 

I've read the study. Utterly unconvincing sociological twaddle that's 10 years out of date. Not even a study, just an opinion piece. I suppose Islamic State, that has come about sinice this publication, has nowt to do with religion either?

Edited July 7, 2016 by Renton

[NJS 3989]

Probably said this before but when it comes to Islam, politics, faith and culture all meld into one identity and motivational base.

 

I think there have been other examples of this - probably including the kamikaze pilots as mentioned - but it's Islam that matters on the global scale now.

[Dr Gloom 20045]

Don't you get a bonus virgin for killing yourself in the name of Allah? Seems a bit unfair

[Rayvin 4964]

It's a culture war more than a religious one IMO. Either way, we don't help ourselves in how we handle the middle east.