Bush Go Home

Good idea! :-D

nice!

I am sure it is just going to spark debate but I would think the term "war criminal" would be reserved for the likes of Hitler not some one who started a war to free a contry from a person like Sadam. I certainly do NOT think Bush is a good president or good man but I do not think he is a war criminal and anyone who says we did this for oil hasn't bought gas here in America anytime recently. And please do not say that Iraq was better before the US got there.

There are better ways to show the world that you do not approve of the actions of Bush. How about gettting your country and or the UN to take some sort of action (trade restrictions etc) against us rather than going to a protest that does nothing but make news and everyone says, "oh look a bunch of tree hugging hippies!".

War Criminal? hmm - how does one call a man, who decides to start war without proper legitimation? ...

You know, this is a good blog, and I enjoy reading it. But seriously, you need to layoff on the whole being an idiot about Bush thing... I realize he has made mistakes but none of them are bad enough to be called a "war criminal." Troops in Iraq may not be there because of "Weapons of Mass Destruction," but they're there none-the-less and while they're there they are saving fricken lives. Seriously, Sadam was mustard gasing vilage wells for shit's sake. That's not happening anymore. And far less Iraqies are dieing because of the efforts from the Bush administration. So take a chill pill with all the fricking Bush-slamming. Geez...

"War Criminal? hmm – how does one call a man, who decides to start war without proper legitimation? ..."

I call him a life-saver... I think his "proper legitimation" would be saving lives...

"I certainly do NOT think Bush is a good president or good man but I do not think he is a war criminal and anyone who says we did this for oil hasn’t bought gas here in America anytime recently." Saddam planned to trade his oil in €uro rather than in US-Dollars. If that would spread, the economy of the US would be ruined.

"And please do not say that Iraq was better before the US got there." I guess it was. But maybe it will become better in the future. /hope

I dislike Bush much more for the inner politics in the US than for the war in Iraq. Using terrorism as an excuse to take the rights from citizens and lying to them to start a war is a really bad thing, methinks.

Whose lives have been saved by this war? As far as I can see thousands of Iraqui are now loosing there lifes to a civil war like state with a government without any way to enforce the law in the country.

Eventhough this war is illegitimate unarguably, I am somewhat hopeful that in the end (like in 10-20 years) this will have a positive effect.

But , nevertheless, conquering a foreign country without a valid reason (there was none) is a crime at least in Germany.
Saddam was a dictator and he did his evil deeds, but seriously, so do others time and time again today too. Even more evil, than a Saddam was able to be. Those are in a very comfortable position right now. USA won't start a war against anyone anytime soon, the administration gambles away all the credibility they had outside USA. They are in no position to start a new initiative. This is one reason, why they highlight how important diplomacy is in the conflict with Iran. They just don't have any other option left.

I understand, that the resentiments toward USA are hardly bearable for the people there. But one has to understand, that they are triggered by USA's actions to the outer world. And this lame excuse for a president represents this country to the outer world. I don't know if he believes or doesn't believe if what he did is right, but I am sure he secretly sees the consequences aren't. He weakended USA's position in almost all regards and is too little a man to concede it. This makes the whole show so pathetic to me.

well we have a sticky situation here. most of those politicians in the USA who so vehemently protest the war now, agreed at the time that it was right. they voted to declare war, overwhelmingly. now we find out we were all wrong about the WMDs, and we have egg on our faces. rather than being charitable, and helping us rebuild iraq, and correct our mistake, the EU just shits on us.

Now, Iran announces to the world they have nuclear capabilities. So since we shot all our credibility, now we dont want to handle it, and of course the EU wont jeopardize their own precious oil supply (after all thats why they didnt join us in Iraq, they wanted to keep exploiting the oil-for-food program...) so they will do nothing.

Nobody will do anything, and before we know it, Israel will have been nuked, or worse, more than just Israel. Maybe Somebody will sneak a bomb into New York, or London, or who knows where. Maybe even Paris.

So at this point, whats better for the WORLD?? Make a big jerk of yourself calling america war criminals, or actually helping us make it right??

buhatkj, making what right? According to your president everything is already right. Nothing to fix.
When you loose credibility, you have to re-earn it. But I can't see this being the case. There is a huge population to be convinced, that US administration is not trying to trick again and play their own hidden games. I don't believe, and never believed, that anyone in US administration was ever convinced Iraq were a threat to the world. Even before this infamous UN security council session the "evidences" were debunked in europeans press.
And the "european Food-For-Oil-Conspiracy" has been part of the propaganda too. Having been called all the names ever possible by american "patriots", one sooner or later stops caring about it...

And all this mind games about a bomb in Paris and nuked Israel is the very same shit that we got dished out prior to Iraq war. To sow fear is as powerful as it is loathsome.

You can see here, live and in colour, the utter mistrust toward your administration. So propose something to cure this and then one can think about further steps.

----
Note, that governments evaluate facts differently than the people in the respective countries do (of course there is not "the one" public opinion either).

baal, ok so what are you saying here? that everything is just hunky-dory and iran is no problem and we should just ignore the whole thing (stop "sowing fear?" ) and get on with our lives? seems a little irresponsible to me...
OK, so you don't trust bush, can't blame you, but see for yourself!
Britain for example is at least is trying to help, but all france, germany and russia do is complain.
So now, we have lost your trust, and you have lost ours.

Niko is absolutely right. Look up how 'war criminal' is defined. Try wikipedia, for example.

"Britain for example is at least is trying to help, but all france, germany and russia do is complain.
So now, we have lost your trust, and you have lost ours." You trusted us to help you do things we think are wrong? That sounds quite idiotic.

"baal, ok so what are you saying here? that everything is just hunky-dory and iran is no problem and we should just ignore the whole thing (stop “sowing fear?” ) and get on with our lives? seems a little irresponsible to me…" What? You really think they might actually use nukes? I don't. And they will have them anyway if they want to(and of course they want to). We can't stop them and neither do we have the right to.

“Britain for example is at least is trying to help, but all france, germany and russia do is complain.
So now, we have lost your trust, and you have lost ours.”

The key point is: no UN mandate => no proper legitimation for war => no constitutional state is able to join it without breaking the (public international) law. don't think it is difficult to understand this.

altogether there are many contrary opinions which should and can be discussed. feelings cna't be discussed and you cannot convince someone to feel, what you feel. anyway some people are trying above...

for those who think in black & white:
who's right and who's wrong will show the reflection of the war, which definitely will be done by the next us government... or history.

welp, ok then. do nothing. I hope you guys are happy with how it all turns out.
But I don't think you will be.

>You know, this is a good blog, and I enjoy reading it. But seriously, you need to layoff on the whole being an idiot about Bush thing… I realize he has made mistakes but none of them are bad enough to be called a “war criminal.”

I agree totally, well said Andrew. Sad when people throw words around like “war criminal”, without thinking about what those words mean. Oh well :(

Teal'C

everybody has his own opinion, that's mine. And as zutuck already said: look up the definition of war criminal, if you like. If a country like iran for example did what bush did recently I guess maybe lots of people would name them 'war criminals' a lot earlier.

I think people with activist tendencies tend to like to oversimplify things that are not simple at all. After all, when demonstrating, you can't really fit the whole argument on a banner, or shout all of it down a megaphone and hope people will listen. So simplifying it all down to 'Bush is a war criminal' is a convenient, if also unrepresentative, contraction.

There are many, many dimensions to this issue and just looking for a 2-line Wikipedia definition to reinforce your position doesn't do the subject any justice at all. Neither does a blog entry, so ironically I'm arguing against my own post here. But I digress.

I'll come clean - I'm British. We have a kind of love/hate relationship with the US - we kinda get on in most things, and we certainly have common views on many issues, but to us the US often tends to be like a brash, stepping-in-with-size-10s, bigger and louder younger brother. We'd like to clap our hands over his mouth sometimes, but he's too strong for that. So we try to give him solid older-brother type advice and hope he doesn't do too much damage, all the while smoothing ruffled feathers in his wake.

Bottom line is that the US is trying to do the right thing. Often they don't know how to do it properly, but they try anyway. Nothing in this world is perfect, except hindsight - something which activists have on their side in spades, but politicians do not. Do I think Saddam should have been toppled? Yes, absolutely. Do I think it was done right? No - the post-Saddam planning was just appalling, leading to the current situation. Do I think other regions have dictators just as bad? Yes, but none in such a strategic position, and you have to start somewhere. Do I think Bush is a moron? Perhaps not quite a moron, but he's not that bright when it comes to how things work in countries that aren't the US, which is why he's in this mess. But a war criminal? No.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but by blogging it, it's fair game for counter arguments :)

"[...] but he’s not that bright when it comes to how things work in countries that aren’t the US, [...]"

he isn't that bright when it comes to how things work in the us neither. :p

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

this was hilarious too: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879

I remember that Clinton was put on trial because of his supposedly lies on the Monica Lewinsky affair. At least, his lies didn't harm anybody, except maybe his wife. And nothing happened to Bush, who lied about massive weapons of destructions in Irak, and the result of this lie caused death for a lot of people , american soldiers included. So, yes, Bush is a war criminal. Somebody said something like : don't judge people on what they say, but on what they do. And if we look at the results of Bush actions...

niko -- please leave political shite out of your irrlicht blog. keep it politic-free please... i get enough of that from media and at work.

AMEN I agree with lug!

Congratulation Niko. I hate the political games, but every mature man must show his opinion about similar scopes. I'm nice surprised by fact that in your country administration of University grants vacation of students which wants to show their standpoints about similar important things.

LMFAO, this is too funny. You're all entitled to your opinions, no matter how wrong they are and how much propganda and newspapers you've corrupted your mind with.

I always wonder what the result of this type of demonstrations would be. Would any leader really care about it? Like, "Uh-oh, those people out there don't like my attitude - I think I'll change it completely". Not really, eh?
The power of democracy lies within the constitutional procedures (as I dare to call it). E.g., if you don't like someone's actions, don't vote for him. Or, if in another country, vote for the party that will act internationally, according to your opinions.
All other things don't really have an effect, IMHO. Well, besides from having some fun and meeting nice people and causing lots of expenses for the public. ;-P

Admittedly, this is different if you *have* no democracy. Then, a country-wide raid seems to be the instrument of choice to me.

my 2 cents

i'd like to reply to comment number 6 by Andrew: are you in your mind?? u say that your US forces are saving ppls lives in iraq?? i m sure u r lost! thousands of people are dying in iraq coz of bombings and all that shit... saddam wasnt that bad i m sure... AND even if saddam was that bad, what the hell is the matter with bush's ass and us's ass to attack a nation on purely the basis of its might and no negotiation! ???

"… saddam wasnt that bad i m sure…"

Heh, you REALLY need to do your homework better before wading into a political debate.

iran has a lot oil and bush has an oil company.
Thats business. Get it.

Bush doesnt care if he has to kill for oil.