Is It Important That Boris is a Liar ?

[Venturi Swirl]

How many mistakes can you include in one post.

Iraq posed no threat, google WMD.

Corbyn said Bin Laden should have been tried under international law and the fact that he didn’t was the tragedy.

“Jeremy Corbyn has come under fire for saying it was a “tragedy” that Osama bin Laden was killed by the US rather than being put on trial.

The Labour leadership frontrunner made the remarks shortly after the special forces raid in 2011 on the al-Qaida chief’s Pakistan compound in which he and four others were shot dead.

In an interview for Iranian television, he suggested the assassination of the mastermind behind the September 11 attacks would result in deeper unrest.

It is the latest in a series of past comments and associations that the veteran left-winger has been forced to defend since emerging as the surprise favourite to succeed Ed Miliband.

In a clip from the Press TV show the Agenda, Corbyn is heard complaining that there had been “no attempt whatsoever that I can see to arrest him and put him on trial, to go through that process”. He went on: “This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

“The World Trade Center was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Torture has come back on to the world stage, been canonised virtually into law by Guantánamo and Bagram.

“Can’t we learn some lessons from this? Are we just going to sink deeper and deeper?

“The next stage will be an attempted assassination on Gaddafi and so it will go on. This will just make the world more dangerous and worse and worse and worse.”

A spokesman for Corbyn said he was “a total opponent of al-Qaida, all it stands for”.

He was proved correct.

Iraq posed no threat to stability in the Middle East??  Really??  And Saddam wasnt busy killing thousands of his own citizens either I suppose.  Of course we should have just let him get on with it, that would have been far better, let him gas men, women and children, just like we should have let Hitler get on with it I suppose. 

Notice how Corbyn denunces terrorism and in the very next breath denounces the Americans.  His usual tactic, just as I described. He also. clearly described Bin Laden’s death as an assassination and a tragedy, no matter how you attempt to post rationalise it. 

[faithlilly]

Iraq posed no threat to stability in the Middle East??  Really??  And Saddam wasnt busy killing thousands of his own citizens either I suppose.  Of course we should have just let him get on with it, that would have been far better, let him gas men, women and children, just like we should have let Hitler get on with it I suppose. 

Notice how Corbyn denunces terrorism and in the very next breath denounces the Americans.  His usual tactic, just as I described. He also. clearly described Bin Laden’s death as an assassination and a tragedy, no matter how you attempt to post rationalise it.

Please don’t pretend that the reason America invaded Iraq was to protect the Iraqi population from Saddam. 2.4 million have been killed since 2003 and if you want to protect people from a dictator you don’t arm him to the teeth as America did during the Iran/Iraq war when they were courting Sadam.

Under international law Bin Laden’s death was an assassination and a tragedy as Corbyn said, which has lead to countless deaths both in the west and the Middle East. Bin Laden should have been tried for his crimes, just as the Nazis were at Nuremberg. Instead America made him a martyr and we gave the terrorists a further reason to hate us.

I would learn my history if I was you and especially the principle of causality.

[Venturi Swirl]

Please don’t pretend that the reason America invaded Iraq was to protect the Iraqi population from Saddam. 2.4 million have been killed since 2003 and if you want to protect people from a dictator you don’t arm him to the teeth as America did during the Iran/Iraq war when they were courting Sadam.

Under international law Bin Laden’s death was an assassination and a tragedy as Corbyn said, which has lead to countless deaths both in the west and the Middle East. Bin Laden should have been tried for his crimes, just as the Nazis were at Nuremberg. Instead America made him a martyr and we gave the terrorists a further reason to hate us.

I would learn my history if I was you and especially the principle of causality.

Kindly don’t lecture me about history.  Saddam was an enabler of terrorism against the West and Israel.  He posed a threat to both, directly or indirectly.  Bin Laden’s death was not a tragedy, the death of 2000 plus in the Twin Towers was a tragedy.  You don’t think Bin Laden on trial and in prison would have given terrorists an excuse for further atrocities?  They really don’t need much of one you know. 

[faithlilly]

Kindly don’t lecture me about history.  Saddam was an enabler of terrorism against the West and Israel.  He posed a threat to both, directly or indirectly.  Bin Laden’s death was not a tragedy, the death of 2000 plus in the Twin Towers was a tragedy.  You don’t think Bin Laden on trial and in prison would have given terrorists an excuse for further atrocities?  They really don’t need much of one you know.

I’m sorry but your post is simply rehashed propaganda.

In what way did Sadam ‘enable’ terrorism ? He was a secular leader and afraid of the pernicious rise of fundamental Islam. To claim that he encouraged it is simply false.

As to Bin Laden, you either believe in international law or you don’t....you can’t pick and chose.

[Venturi Swirl]

I’m sorry but your post is simply rehashed propaganda.

In what way did Sadam ‘enable’ terrorism ? He was a secular leader and afraid of the pernicious rise of fundamental Islam. To claim that he encouraged it is simply false.

As to Bin Laden, you either believe in international law or you don’t....you can’t pick and chose.

Sometimes laws have to be broken for the greater good, this is one of those occasions IMO.  Dangerous men (it’s usually men) are shot dead on the streets of London by police and that is perfectly acceptable, Bin Laden certainly fell into the category of “dangerous man”. 
As for Saddam, your views are similar to those of Donald Trump’s. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-saddam-hussein-was-an-opponent-of-terrorism-hes-wrong

[Venturi Swirl]

One question remains regarding Iraq's terrorism capability: Is there anything in the captured archives to indicate that Saddam had the will to use his terrorist capabilities directly against United States? Judging from examples of Saddam's statements (Extract 34) before the 1991 Gulf War with the United States, the answer is yes.
Extract 34.
[19 April 1990]
"IfAmerica interferes we will strike. You know us, we are not the talkative type who holds the microphone and says things only, we do what we say. Maybe we cannot reach Washington but we can send someone with an ex- plosive belt to reach Washington."
"We can send people to Washington... a person with explosive belt around him could throw himself on Bush's car. 107
In the years between the two Gulf Wars, UN sanctions reduced Sad- dam's ability to shape regional and world events, steadily draining his military, economic, and military powers. The rise of Islamist fundamentalism in the region gave Saddam the opportunity to make terrorism, one of the few tools remaining in Saddam's "coercion" toolbox, not only cost effective but a formal instrument of state power. Saddam nurtured this capability with an infrastructure supporting (1) his own particular brand of state terrorism against internal and external threats, (2) the state sponsorship of suicide operations, and (3) organizational relationships and "outreach programs" for terrorist groups. Evidence that was uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/v1.pdf

[Venturi Swirl]

Saddam's Terror Links
Updated March 24, 2008 12:01 am ET
PRINT
TEXT
Five years on, few Iraq myths are as persistent as the notion that the Bush Administration invented a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Yet a new Pentagon report suggests that Iraq's links to world-wide terror networks, including al Qaeda, were far more extensive than previously understood.

Naturally, it's getting little or no attention. Press accounts have been misleading or outright distortions, while the Bush Administration seems indifferent. Even John McCain has let the study's revelations float by. But that doesn't make the facts any less notable or true.


The redacted version of "Saddam and Terrorism" is the most definitive public assessment to date from the Harmony program, the trove of "exploitable" documents, audio and video records, and computer files captured in Iraq. On the basis of about 600,000 items, the report lays out Saddam's willingness to use terrorism against American and other international targets, as well as his larger state sponsorship of terror, which included harboring, training and equipping jihadis throughout the Middle East.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120631495290958169

[faithlilly]

Sometimes laws have to be broken for the greater good, this is one of those occasions IMO.  Dangerous men (it’s usually men) are shot dead on the streets of London by police and that is perfectly acceptable, Bin Laden certainly fell into the category of “dangerous man”. 
As for Saddam, your views are similar to those of Donald Trump’s. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-saddam-hussein-was-an-opponent-of-terrorism-hes-wrong

If there is an immediate danger then action must be taken to defuse that danger. If not then the law should be allowed to take it’s course.

As an aside do you think those tried at Nuremberg should have been executed without a trial ?

[faithlilly]

One question remains regarding Iraq's terrorism capability: Is there anything in the captured archives to indicate that Saddam had the will to use his terrorist capabilities directly against United States? Judging from examples of Saddam's statements (Extract 34) before the 1991 Gulf War with the United States, the answer is yes.
Extract 34.
[19 April 1990]
"IfAmerica interferes we will strike. You know us, we are not the talkative type who holds the microphone and says things only, we do what we say. Maybe we cannot reach Washington but we can send someone with an ex- plosive belt to reach Washington."
"We can send people to Washington... a person with explosive belt around him could throw himself on Bush's car. 107
In the years between the two Gulf Wars, UN sanctions reduced Sad- dam's ability to shape regional and world events, steadily draining his military, economic, and military powers. The rise of Islamist fundamentalism in the region gave Saddam the opportunity to make terrorism, one of the few tools remaining in Saddam's "coercion" toolbox, not only cost effective but a formal instrument of state power. Saddam nurtured this capability with an infrastructure supporting (1) his own particular brand of state terrorism against internal and external threats, (2) the state sponsorship of suicide operations, and (3) organizational relationships and "outreach programs" for terrorist groups. Evidence that was uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/v1.pdf

From the document you posted.

‘This study found no "smoking gun" (i.e., direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda.’

Makes you wonder why they attacked Iraq.

[faithlilly]

Saddam's Terror Links
Updated March 24, 2008 12:01 am ET
PRINT
TEXT
Five years on, few Iraq myths are as persistent as the notion that the Bush Administration invented a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Yet a new Pentagon report suggests that Iraq's links to world-wide terror networks, including al Qaeda, were far more extensive than previously understood.

Naturally, it's getting little or no attention. Press accounts have been misleading or outright distortions, while the Bush Administration seems indifferent. Even John McCain has let the study's revelations float by. But that doesn't make the facts any less notable or true.


The redacted version of "Saddam and Terrorism" is the most definitive public assessment to date from the Harmony program, the trove of "exploitable" documents, audio and video records, and computer files captured in Iraq. On the basis of about 600,000 items, the report lays out Saddam's willingness to use terrorism against American and other international targets, as well as his larger state sponsorship of terror, which included harboring, training and equipping jihadis throughout the Middle East.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120631495290958169

Sounds like the justification for an illegal war to me.

[Venturi Swirl]

From the document you posted.

‘This study found no "smoking gun" (i.e., direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda.’

Makes you wonder why they attacked Iraq.

Why do you think they spent a trillion dollars doing so? 

[Miss Taken Identity]

From the document you posted.

‘This study found no "smoking gun" (i.e., direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda.’

Makes you wonder why they attacked Iraq.

Oil darling Oil.  Do we really believe that Blair and bush gave a toss about Kurds in the North or Shia muslims who fled to Iran? IF is was out of compassion to save people then why stop at Iraq  anyone looking at Africa?

[faithlilly]

Oil darling Oil.  Do we really believe that Blair and bush gave a toss about Kurds in the North or Shia muslims who fled to Iran? IF is was out of compassion to save people then why stop at Iraq  anyone looking at Africa?

Of course and Libya later. 

[Venturi Swirl]

Of course and Libya later.

The US gets only a very small percentage  its oil from Iraq or Libya so I think that is a bit of a red herring.

[faithlilly]

The US gets hardly any of its oil from Iraq or Libya so I think that is a bit of a red herring.

I don’t think things panned out as they’d hoped.