Colin Powell died today

[Imnotafemistbut]

AIBU to ask how we all feel about the Iraq war ? I supported it - still do

@Washingtonirving79

Powell helped cover up the My Lai massacre and mutilation of 347 Vietnamese civilians. A war crime.

He led the arming, training and deployment of death squads and torturers in El Salvador, and planned the illegal invasion of Panama. War crimes.

He's one of the Generals responsible for America's advance of Iraq in Operation Desert Storm, famously featuring the massacre of retreating troops on the Highway of Death (another war crime).

He then went on to lie to Congress to deliver the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, leading to deaths of millions in Iraq, Syria and beyond. Guess the next part.

It's fascinating what you're saying there, I'm unaware of Powell's complicity in all of that. As for illegal invasion, I'm not sure it was illegal . There was a trail of resolutions culminating in resolution 1441 but connected to resolution 687, a Chapter VII resolution which authorised the use of force on Iraq.

@HarrietsChariot

I literally hated Tony Blair's government, but the Iraq war was one of the three things I agreed with him on. The other two things abolishing betting tax and introducing round-the-clock drinking. Literally everything else they did was appalling but fair play for the war, Saddam Hussein was a massive cunt and the world is a better place without him.

I feel exactly the same way. The world's a safer place without the monster Saddam Hussein in it.

@HarrietsChariot so you hated all the investment in children’s centres and education but loved the drinking, betting and war.

Wow.

That's true ^ Washington the bit I know of him is all from the time when I still believed too so I still think of him as one of the better people from then.

I really can't bring myself to care about Colin Powell. he made his choices in life.

And YABU for this gleeful post about a war that killed up to 1 million Iraqi people, shame on you. Their blood is not worth less just because they are not British / white.

@HarrietsChariot

I literally hated Tony Blair's government, but the Iraq war was one of the three things I agreed with him on. The other two things abolishing betting tax and introducing round-the-clock drinking. Literally everything else they did was appalling but fair play for the war, Saddam Hussein was a massive cunt and the world is a better place without him.

You have no clue what you're on about. The killing of 1 million people to justify his death? Such gleeful, horrific posts, shame on you.

@phishy

I really can't bring myself to care about Colin Powell. he made his choices in life.

And YABU for this gleeful post about a war that killed up to 1 million Iraqi people, shame on you. Their blood is not worth less just because they are not British / white.

What's "gleeful" about it?

Saddam himself was a mass murderer responsible for heaven knows how many atrocities, up to the time he was ousted.

Had he not been, I think it's likely he would have resumed that rate of killing.

The Iraq war was a monstrous act.

@Imnotafemistbut can I just ask why you still support it when evidence has shown that there were no grounds for it?

Saddam himself was a mass murderer responsible for heaven knows how many atrocities, up to the time he was ousted.

Had he not been, I think it's likely he would have resumed that rate of killing

There are many regimes which still have appalling human rights records. China, not least. Who kill the most people in the world in capital punishments. Or North Korea who, as late as the 1990s was subjecting it's citizens to the type of experimentation inflicted by Mengele.

Funnily enough, the US is never keen to go for regime change there. I wonder why?

I support it because he was a total monster who had used WMD in the form of chemical weapons. He'd used them on the Iranians and the Kurds. I believe that if he'd still been in power when Al Qaeda / ISIS/ whoever got going in the ME, he'd have supplied them with much more effective weaponry, possibly his WMD.

People tend to forget that Saddam was a Sunni strongman and Al Qaeda in Iraq (later I(SIS) was happier killing Shi'a than anyone from the West. We just like to make it All About Us.

@Itsnotover

Saddam himself was a mass murderer responsible for heaven knows how many atrocities, up to the time he was ousted.

Had he not been, I think it's likely he would have resumed that rate of killing

There are many regimes which still have appalling human rights records. China, not least. Who kill the most people in the world in capital punishments. Or North Korea who, as late as the 1990s was subjecting it's citizens to the type of experimentation inflicted by Mengele.

Funnily enough, the US is never keen to go for regime change there. I wonder why?

That doesn't mean Saddam ought to have been left alone.

If he had been allowed to develop nukes we'd be far too afraid to go near him as we are those rogue nations you mentioned. Then he'd have been allowed to carry on with his persecuting his own people and others.

@Imnotafemistbut

AIBU to ask how we all feel about the Iraq war ? I supported it - still do

Tony, you're on your own with that one.

The world's a safer place without the monster Saddam Hussein in it.

I suggest you watch the Once Upon a Time in Iraq series to why that is demonstratably not the case.

There are many regimes which still have appalling human rights records. China, not least. Who kill the most people in the world in capital punishments. Or North Korea who, as late as the 1990s was subjecting it's citizens to the type of experimentation inflicted by Mengele.

Funnily enough, the US is never keen to go for regime change there. I wonder why?

Exactly, the US/UK/West have turned a blind eye to atrocities and genocides across the world, from Myanmar to Zimbabwe and Sierra Leon to Sudan. It's almost as if a certain natural resource needs to be present before the West takes an interest in supplying a dose of "freedom, justice ,and democracy".

@Bucanarab

The world's a safer place without the monster Saddam Hussein in it.

I suggest you watch the Once Upon a Time in Iraq series to why that is demonstratably not the case.

There are many regimes which still have appalling human rights records. China, not least. Who kill the most people in the world in capital punishments. Or North Korea who, as late as the 1990s was subjecting it's citizens to the type of experimentation inflicted by Mengele.

Funnily enough, the US is never keen to go for regime change there. I wonder why?

Exactly, the US/UK/West have turned a blind eye to atrocities and genocides across the world, from Myanmar to Zimbabwe and Sierra Leon to Sudan. It's almost as if a certain natural resource needs to be present before the West takes an interest in supplying a dose of "freedom, justice ,and democracy".

Again. None of that means Saddam should have been left alone to carry on his killing and persecutions.

You're implication that it was 'all about oil' is specious. China got the oil.

www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/world/middleeast/china-reaps-biggest-benefits-of-iraq-oil-boom.html

Blair lied to the nation, Parliament and cabinet when he falsely represented the intel he saw, but none of these abuses of power are crimes

Which in itself should be. The US should have been left to carry out their own agenda.

I protested the 2003 Iraq "war" and if you supported it at least call it what it what it was a manhunt and clean up of Bush Senior's unfinished business.

Again. None of that means Saddam should have been left alone to carry on his killing and persecutions

None of it means the US/UK/the West should be allowed to take it upon themselves to remove someone from power either. We are not the world police, we don't get to decide what is right or wrong for other nations, and we certainly don't have the right to destroy a country and kill millions of innocent civilians in the process to do it.

You're implication that it was 'all about oil' is specious. China got the oil.

Indeed it does. It's also a huge country with a massive and well equipped military and a population with a shared culture and history spanning thousands of years. I imagine the risk/success assessment for trying to overthrow the Chinese regime and install western ideals was somewhat unfavourable.

I also didn't suggest it was all about oil, I suggested oil was a primary driver. There were undoubtedly other considerations too. But let me ask you this, Saddam was committing atrocities for decades before we finally removed him, his genocide took place in the late 80s, why did we leave him in power until 2003?

If we removed him then purely for altruistic reasons why ignore the other atrocities and genocides happening at the same time? If it was a fear of wmds, why not go after other rougue nations? If it was a fear he might supply terror groups, again why do we ignore other nations doing the same? (also we're quite happy to supply/fund terror groups ourselves so it's massive hypocrisy if that was the reason).

Incidently you also stated earlier you felt Saddam would have supplied terror groups with weapons if he'd been left alone and I have to wonder whether you realise that Saddam was actually suppressing alot of these groups?

Al Qaeda, for example, were been operating since the 80s and had even offered to defend Saudia Arabia against Iraq after the invasion of Kuwait. They were enemies and considering how saddam treated his enemies I can't imagine he'd happily hand them over weapons they might use on him (unlike the West who were more than happy to provide what would become Al Qaeda with a whole range of weaponry).

Yes all fair points, but I don't think any of that remits the case for overthrowing a monster and a tyrant. If, in the face of such tyranny we say 'oh well, we aren't doing anything about X nation's brutality against it's own people, so we best ignore what we see here.'.

It's nonsense to say Saddam was supressing certain Sunni terrorist groups. for one thing, his intelligence people set up the ISIS structure.

[[https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html]

Al Qaeda was already in existence before the Iraq War and growing stronger. ISIS was formed out of Al Qaeda in Iraq which was already operating in various guises under Saddam.

The logical sponsor of Al Qaeda was Saddam . He was the Sunni strong man in the Middle East after all. He would cheerfully have used Al Qaeda as his tool just as Iran uses Hizbollah.