Chilcot report delayed until after election

[Bounce]

so who thinks no matter when its released it will be an accurate account?

 

your kidding yourselfs lol

 

my sentiments exactly. Why even have enquiries about the obvious which the whole world is well aware of and still facing the consequences.

 

---------- Post added 21-01-2015 at 20:54 ----------

 

Why do you suppose that Islamic terrorism as increased more in countries that were not involved in the Iraq war?

 

name one of these countries?

[L00b]

name one of these countries?

Tunisia? Libya? Nigeria? Yemen? Need we add more? (There are more)

[mjw47]

Why do you find it on here for yourself?

 

Have you been drinking? I have, but there you go.

 

If I understand you correctly, why should I?

 

You are making a claim, I am contesting it, I provided the last point in regard to the reason why Blair could be charged as a war criminal, you say he can't be, so explain your contention.

[onenerveleft]

Miliband blocked Iraq war inquiry again and again, says Cameron... and Labour leader dismisses the delay in two sentences

Labour MPs prevented report being published 'years ago', claims PM

Party's leader Ed Miliband personally voted against inquiry four times

Issue erupts after it's revealed Chilcot will not report until after election

Former top Labour figures will come under scrutiny when it's published

 

Why on earth you lot vote for labour or the libtards i will never know

[Mecky]

If I understand you correctly, why should I?

 

You have no intention to and everyone knows why - it's because you'll be stubbed out again and your only intention is to try and drag out a troll

 

---------- Post added 22-01-2015 at 07:36 ----------

 

I find it interesting that this story hit all the headlines on the very day that a file has been related to the paedophile abuse of the 1980s ministerial government has been discovered, which was hardly picked-up by the media. The whole episode smacks of electioneering, then again, most of the mass media in the UK is rightwing

[mjw47]

You have no intention to and everyone knows why - it's because you'll be stubbed out again and your only intention is to try and drag out a troll

 

---------- Post added 22-01-2015 at 07:36 ----------

 

I find it interesting that this story hit all the headlines on the very day that a file has been related to the paedophile abuse of the 1980s ministerial government has been discovered, which was hardly picked-up by the media. The whole episode smacks of electioneering, then again, most of the mass media in the UK is rightwing

 

Stubbed out again? You have an overinflated sense of your own adequacy.

 

Why don't you try to answer the question and tell us why Blair can't be a war criminal when several people a lot more informed than you or I think he was involved in an illegal war?

 

As for your other contention of course it's deflection, it's politics, it's what they do, all of them.

[Mecky]

Stubbed out again? You have an overinflated sense of your own adequacy.

 

Why don't you try to answer the question and tell us why Blair can't be a war criminal when several people a lot more informed than you or I think he was involved in an illegal war?

 

As for your other contention of course it's deflection, it's politics, it's what they do, all of them.

 

Are you still here? Not for long I guess

[Zamo]

Nigeria.........

France and Germany both opposed the Iraq war yet they are both seeing increased terrorist activity.

India.

Indonesia

China

Somalia

Kenya

 

First of all, none of them are Western countries. Secondly, I'm not sure the terrorism problem is new/increased since Western interventions. I think it is more a case of the business as usual struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims that pre-dates recent Western interventions in the Middle East.

 

You are however right, to a degree, in that Western interventions in the Muslim world haven't only affected the Western countries responsible. The actions of the West have acted as a rallying call to Muslims across the world because they see themselves as Muslims first and their national identity is secondary. Muslims have taken up the cause all over the world but the problem is obviously worst in Muslim countries (more of them) and Western countries directly involved with high numbers of Muslims.

 

The underlying problem is Islam and Islamic culture but the catalyst for the 'home grown' terrorism we have seen in the West is without doubt Western interventions in the Muslim world. Try and reverse the situation. If IS invaded parts of Europe, with the well-intended aim of saving our heathen souls, would we rally to a cause that fought against them? Would we be overly concerned about the banner we fought under or would we just fight to defend what we saw as an attack on our chosen way of life? Whilst I am firmly of the opinion that the Islamic extremist is fundamentally an Islam problem, there is no denying that it is a problem the West has made worse.

[anfisa]

First of all, none of them are Western countries. Secondly, I'm not sure the terrorism problem is new/increased since Western interventions. I think it is more a case of the business as usual struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims that pre-dates recent Western interventions in the Middle East.

 

You are however right, to a degree, in that Western interventions in the Muslim world haven't only affected the Western countries responsible. The actions of the West have acted as a rallying call to Muslims across the world because they see themselves as Muslims first and their national identity is secondary. Muslims have taken up the cause all over the world but the problem is obviously worst in Muslim countries (more of them) and Western countries directly involved with high numbers of Muslims.

 

The underlying problem is Islam and Islamic culture but the catalyst for the 'home grown' terrorism we have seen in the West is without doubt Western interventions in the Muslim world. Try and reverse the situation. If IS invaded parts of Europe, with the well-intended aim of saving our heathen souls, would we rally to a cause that fought against them? Would we be overly concerned about the banner we fought under or would we just fight to defend what we saw as an attack on our chosen way of life? Whilst I am firmly of the opinion that the Islamic extremist is fundamentally an Islam problem, there is no denying that it is a problem the West has made worse.

 

I am sure that France and Germany are described as Western countries, and like I already said, Islamic terrorism was increasing globally well before the Iraq/Afghan wars, there is no reason at all to conclude that we have made it worse, and no why of proving it one way or the other.

[Zamo]

I am sure that France and Germany are described as Western countries, and like I already said, Islamic terrorism was increasing globally well before the Iraq/Afghan wars, there is no reason at all to conclude that we have made it worse, and no why of proving it one way or the other.

 

As I said, there has been a knock on impact across the world but it is still worst in countries involved in interventions and in countries with high numbers of Muslims. It has been a global rallying call.

 

As for proving Islamic terrorism is worse now than before... we didn't have home grown Islamic terrorist attacking us before Western interventions in the Muslim world and the terrorist themselves cite it as a reason for attacking us. Pretty conclusive proof in my eyes.

 

What is indisputable is that the 'war on terror' failed and at huge cost in both financial and human terms. There are lessons to be learn and potentially criminals to punish if it transpires we were taken to war on a deliberately false premise. We need to know what happened.