Tony Blair to give all profits to British Legion

[Uncle Liam]

Whoever asked about the US and Rwanda:

Official reason: Too many troops committed elsewhere, specifically Bosnia. Thats what Clinton said in his book.

Real reason: Clinton was embroiled in a sex scandal and had mid terms coming up.

[llcoolphil]

I think with hindsight there is no way we would of invaded Iraq... Its a wonderful thing, hindsight....

[Pogues Mcgogues]

So it's ok for governments to send soldiers to war and then rely on charities to pick up the pieces of what happens to those soldiers? With all the good that can be done with this money, why isn't the government - and I include the last one before you try and wriggle ot of it - spending that money anyway?

[eFestivals]

Blix begged for more time to make conclusions, as little as two weeks I think before the war, and admitted that Iraq were starting to cooperate. The UN backing never came because Bush would ne ver have got it. Bush didnt wait for Blix to say: "We found nothing", which was a matter of weeks away. Then there would have been no justification for war. As was proven later.

Not correct. Blix said they WERE co-operating. Bush said "too late - they should have co-operated years ago".

(But even here it should be noted that the USA had managed to delay the sending of a new inspection team (the Blix team), by trying to stop them going at all. The USA wanted invasion without ANY inspections!!! ... probably because they knew there was nothing to find).

And what Bush forgot to mention is that Saddam only stopped co-operating with the previous inspection after it was discovered that the weapons inspectors had been infiltrated by the CIA - so it wasn't "UN weapons inspections", it was a USA spying mission!!!!

The USA broke the Iraq resolutions themselves by infiltrating the inspectors with spies. So it's a bit rich for the USA to then say "resolution breakers must be invaded".

[RABun]

Think how many trips to eastbourne that money could fund

[oafc0000]

To be fair, there were several million people at the time with the foresight to say we shouldn't invade Iraq

Edited August 17, 2010 by oafc0000

[oafc0000]

So it's ok for governments to send soldiers to war and then rely on charities to pick up the pieces of what happens to those soldiers? With all the good that can be done with this money, why isn't the government - and I include the last one before you try and wriggle ot of it - spending that money anyway?

[llcoolphil]

Several in the UK?

Or around the world ?

[llcoolphil]

He never said that...

[llcoolphil]

I'm sure there are parts of the NHS that can deal with injury from war and respite.

[oafc0000]

In the UK. If you search for it a couple of them went on a march

[oafc0000]

In the UK. If you search for it a couple of them went on a march

[nightcrawler13]

I remember around a million at one of the demos... Not several million though....

[oafc0000]

so the only people who objected to the invasion were the ones who attended that march??

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Hey, can I repeat?

I was fishing with that comment.

[llcoolphil]

I remember around a million at one of the demos... Not several million though....

[Alcatraz]

[oafc0000]

So you believe that every single person opposed to the war went on the march? Just to piont out your idiocy - I didn't.

[Alcatraz]

I think the vast majority who cared went... I don't think as many people as you do truly gave a rats arse before the actual invasion...

[oafc0000]

Rubbish. The majority of people who cared were in no position to travel to London for that march

[Alcatraz]

Explain...

[oafc0000]

I think its ridiculous to think just because people didn't travel down to London and March means they don't care or were in favour of War

[Alcatraz]

The point I am really making is you can't claim x millions gave a shit when you have no way of measuring it...

[llcoolphil]

What about Selly Oak?

[oafc0000]

So shall we assume that when you go to an oldham match you support them, but everytime you miss a game you dont?