Wasn't Blair so stupid when he said "those killing people in Iraq are to be blamed" ? Why is the Brirish army
541461
"Wasn't Blair so stupid when he said"\n\nYou sound like a regular genius.
981025
I agree with a good majority of the replies to this question. you must understand, have exprienced life out there.\n\nOn the other hand!!!! if you actually watched the video before replying to this question you would have a further understanding that the US Forces, as you quite rightly said, are trigger happy, arrogant and deluded.\n\nOk before the abuse starts, yes i have been, let me explain:\n\npoint 1.\nwhy are we there?.... well we, UK, are there because Blair is so far up Bush's arse you can see the soles of his shoes.\nWhy are you, US, there? ........because you suffered a terrorist attack for the first time in your history. we have lived with this evil for over 30 Years,IRA, but what do you do about it......invade a country looking for 1 man....don't find him....fuck it....so lets invade another one.\n\nPoint 2.   \nDrawing Fire.....hmmm!!!!! the idea of drawing fire or as UK Forces use, covering fire is to what ?  to keep the heads of the enemy down so we can advance and clear the enemy positons.\nWhat we see in the video is US Forces firing at, yet again, Fuck all.\nPoint 3.\nThey were engaged in a 6 Min fire fight and how many did they kill???? a big fat fucking ZERO!!!!. Nice shooting boys !!!!!! have you tried aiming?\nPoint 4.\nHearts and Minds...its a basic concept, very basic,win the hearts and minds of the people and you will beat terrorism because the people will do the intelligence for you. alienating every iraq you meet is not a good idea.\nFinal Point.....thank god i hear you say\nReply from SGT to this question, i quote "USMC when in doubt, empty the mag"\nenough said!!!!\n\n\nDont bother replying to this comment as i will be out of the country very soon, currently packing for a little holiday in Afghanistan, yet again cleaning the shit up created by another country........nice job in afghan boys.......bomb the the shit out of it and leave...it's ok we'll clean up for you.
931450
That's just a rehash of Blair's 'with rights comes responsibility' line - for everyone but him - he's just been giving his best one liners to Bush.  That couldn't have taken long!
872680
I strongly disagree. Their foreign policy is disastrous. Look at Iraq continually sliding to all-out civil war. Look at the support Bush gave the repressive regime in Azerbaijan just because it is a supporter in the war on terror. Even though I agree with both Bush and Blair on social issues, I would not think twice of electing even the most liberal candidate to replace them.
986912
Yes they frigging well have! They blow things out of all proportion and now everyone is against it because troops are being killed. When we sign up we know that we are at risk of being mobilised to warzones and the consequences this can bring. I am only in the Territorial Army (reservists) and if my time comes to serve Queen and Country over in Iraq i will.
774119
I agree with you completly, he has totally ruined our country. It is ridiculous how much of our lives are now controlled by Europe, which is all thanks to Mr Blair. And about America, well Blair is more Bush than Bush is. He has betrayed the cuntry i think.
1124657
wrong as wrong can be, every death that has happened over there since the day of our invasion, has to blamed on bush.  he should be tried as a war crimminal in iraq.
988532
Hilers reason were murder, genocide and to get more realestate to expand the German empire, plain and simple, he had no valid reason to march into Poland to rid it of the Jewish people there as he saw it, to save the Polish people from themselves by purification of the race. He did the same to Vienna. Even is our motive to go into IRAq was to secure oil, in getting Sadam out iof power was a good thing, and if innocents are killed by airstrikes or just renegade Marines, then's that non combatant fatalities for you, there are no innocents in war.
933219
I bet he would be elected! The Iraqi's were far better off under him than they are under us and most can't stand us! The prime minister is telling US troops to withdraw because of there negative effect on Iraqi's, mean while the rest hide in the Green Zone! The prime minister is no fan of the US! One question he asked the military was why they think they have any arrest powers in Iraq since he is the head of the government, not the US!\n\nAnd he isn't really very happy about all the torture that is going on and the murders!
1138931
Wasn't it Saddam who murdered thousands of Kurds? How is that for ethnic cleansing? I think you are out of your mind.
1126510
George Bush should have the blame because if it weren't for his illegal and idiotic war that IS NOT for freedom those marines would not have been there to kill the innocent.\n\nBush should be put on trial for those murders just the same as they are trying Saddam Hussain for the same reason.
1083506
This is the animal who cut Kenneth Bigleys (British civilian contractor) head off with a butchers knife, whilst he pleaded for his life, on video.\n\nThat mans family (who were not supporters of the war by the way) now never go a day without the haunting image of their brother, son, having his head severed from his neck with a fountain of blood as shown on Al Jazeera.\n\nHe personally did three "live for TV" beheadings and sponsored the rest.\n\nIs is a good thing this beast is dead?  Damn right it is!\n\nAl Zarquawi was a Jordanian. He was not an Iraqi or a freedom fighter, and nor are most of his Sunni followers.\n\nDoes his death mark the end of the insurgency, no of course it doesnt, but it is important as it clearly shows that Iraqis are starting to turn against the real foreign invaders and that is the bunch of criminals who are only in that devastated country to cause civil war between the Sunni and Shi'tes.
51453
Tony Blair has caught a lot of criticism from his fellow countrymen, much like that other leader . . . George W. Bush.  The majority of his critics, like in President Bush's case, is from the opposition party to that which is in power.  Although I am not British, I have kept up with their news, and it appears that Prime Minister Blair is doing well.  The media, (remember it's the liberal media, while Bush & Blair are respecitvely conservatives), has been attacking both of the leaders for about the last three years.  Gee, I guess that's why the U.N. military commander in Bosnia is the "FORMER".  I haven't read any positive news concerning Bosnia and the U.N. involvement.  So, putting two & two together, the proverbial statement holds true, "Those who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones."  Or to reference the Word, "He who is without sin, may cast the first stone."  If anyone would like to forward this to that FORMER U.N. military commander in Bosnia, you have my full permission . . . . if President Bush or Prime Minister Blair are doing so poorly, then I'd like to see you do better!  Come on, you've got my vote.  I'm sure your response is something like the following:  "No, I don't want that job!"  Good, then sit back, shut up, fasten your seatbelt, enjoy the ride and just use sunscreen!  Sorry, I'm a history major and love to argue politics.  Although evidently biased, maybe it shed some light on your question.
933990
It seems most logical to blame those directly responsible for beginning the mess: the Bush Administration. It was they who went around mustering support for the war at the start and then went in over and above the United Nations and invaded. It would be inaccurate to blame the Democrats, they were not in power. It would be inaccurate to blame the 'Liberal Media' because there was much more talking up of the war amongst the likes of Fox etc than there were from more 'Liberal' media sources. Blaming Liberals or people in the blue states is silly for the same reason as blaming the Democrats. And to blame "Islamo Fascists" is just plain uninformed. Anyone who has any idea of the Middle East pre-9/11 and the Iraq invasion knew that Saddam and Osama were as far away from allies as they could be. Osama hated the secularist rule of Saddam in Iraq. And although Al Qaeda is not the only "Islamo Fascist" group, it is far above and beyond the power and reach of any other such group.
815196
tony blair cant answer this question because he has repealed the last hanging law in britain, the treason law, because he is a traitor to britain as regards europe and has covered his back, but in the eyes of the free english you cant have laws repealed in england by traitors, sooooo he cant very well cry for hanging can he even if it is saddam.
715871
The Shiites will celebrate and the Sunni's will weep, he will die a martyr, because his capture followed his standing up to Bush and Blair, defending his country.  The Islamists  won't care either way, as they didn't consider him to be following the way that God had intended all Muslims to follow.  Their greatest enemies are Bush and Blair, who are responsible for more deaths than Saddam ever was.  The civil war will last a very long time, and when it is over, another dictator will take Saddam's place.  Since the 10th century, strong ruthless leaders have always rules Iraq, because of all the different sections which make up Iraqi society and they tend to have a tribal mentality, only a very severe leader could control them
581909
I think it is stupid for any country to eliminate their standing military forces. There will always be some country out there wanting what some other country has. England of all countries should know that, with the number of wars they have been direct participants in (as either attacker or attackee).