IS kill Christians

[Arundelred]

OK I retract the unfounded suggestion that you were talking sense!!

Spoken like a true accountant who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

[Arundelred]

Can we all agree on one thing..?

Tony Blair and George Bush senior should be tried for war crimes.

Why them ? They never killed anyone. Like Adolf Eichmann it is those who followed ORDERS who should be tried, without whom no conflict would ever be possible. According to the Nuremburg War Trials obedience to orders is not an excuse.

[AfghanRam]

[quote="Arundelred"]You dont often talk sense Arundel but in this case I applaud you. However in making your point you also by inference would appear therefore to justify the US et al reactoive strikes. This is the problem that one wrong seems to legitimise subsequent wrongs.

I also fail to see any distinction between so called "legal" and "illegal" wars. How can any war be "legal"? How can its legaility under one country's legal code make any difference. War is never justified except as a defensive reaction to the aggression of another. Thus one could argue WW2 was justifiable as regards England but not as regards Germany etc etc.

The removal of ****q from Kuwait might thus be a justifiable action (not necessarily legal) if requested by a sovereign state from its ally, but the continuance of that war into an act of invasion into another country is no more def

[Arundelred]

[quote="AfghanRam"]You dont often talk sense Arundel but in this case I applaud you. However in making your point you also by inference would appear therefore to justify the US et al reactoive strikes. This is the problem that one wrong seems to legitimise subsequent wrongs.

I also fail to see any distinction between so called "legal" and "illegal" wars. How can any war be "legal"? How can its legaility under one country's legal code make any difference. War is never justified except as a defensive reaction to the aggression of another. Thus one could argue WW2 was justifiable as regards England but not as regards Germany etc etc.

The removal of ****q from Kuwait might thus be a justifiable action (not necessarily legal) if requested by a sovereign state from its ally, but the continuance of that war into an act of

[AnagRam]

Christ...I wish you two would give it a rest...and to suggest that the 'foot soldiers' are more responsible than those who give the orders is just completely facile, Arundel

[AfghanRam]

[quote="Arundelred"]You dont often talk sense Arundel but in this case I applaud you. However in making your point you also by inference would appear therefore to justify the US et al reactoive strikes. This is the problem that one wrong seems to legitimise subsequent wrongs.

I also fail to see any distinction between so called "legal" and "illegal" wars. How can any war be "legal"? How can its legaility under one country's legal code make any difference. War is never justified except as a defensive reaction to the aggression of another. Thus one could argue WW2 was justifiable as regards England but not as regards Germany etc etc.

The removal of ****q from Kuwait might thus be a justifiable action (not necessarily legal) if requested by a sovereign state from its ally, bu

[Arundelred]

[quote="AfghanRam"]You dont often talk sense Arundel but in this case I applaud you. However in making your point you also by inference would appear therefore to justify the US et al reactoive strikes. This is the problem that one wrong seems to legitimise subsequent wrongs.

I also fail to see any distinction between so called "legal" and "illegal" wars. How can any war be "legal"? How can its legaility under one country's legal code make any difference. War is never justified except as a defensive reaction to the aggression of another. Thus one could argue WW2 was justifiable as regards England but not as regards Germany etc etc.

The removal of ****q from Kuwait might thus be a justifiable action (not necessarily legal) if requ

[AfghanRam]

Old habits die hard ;-)

[Arundelred]

Christ...I wish you two would give it a rest...and to suggest that the 'foot soldiers' are more responsible than those who give the orders is just completely facile, Arundel

Until someone can prove to me how those who give orders can achieve their aims without a compliant military, I will not give it a rest. I don't how many Hitler killed in WW1 when he was a lowly corporal, but he definitely did not in WW2. That was left to supposedly sane Germans who descendants today are not much different from most Europeans.

[Acido]

Id like to book a wake up call. Somebody wake me up when this is over