so how do you sleep at night?

[Heathcliffscathy]

Since we invaded Iraq:

24,865 iraqi civilians have been killed. That's mothers, daughters, sons and fathers. And it's almost 0.1 percent of the entire population.

10% were under 18 years old

And 'the coalition' killed 9270 of them.

I can't sleep at night cause of this. I live in London and love London and hate what happened last week but it makes it look pathetic in comparison doesn't it?

I CAN'T sleep at night because of this. There are plenty of atrocities happening around the world as I write. But this one is done in my name. Even though I marched and even though I didn't vote Labour (because of this issue primarily), this is done in my name because I am British and proud of it.

The Americans and the British are saying that it's not their job to count up civilian deaths. What does that say to the Muslim populations of the world given how painstakingly and rightly so they have been counting our dead in London this last week? And Mr Blair dares to say that this atrocity, whereby 4 British kids blew themselves up to kill people has nothing to do with Iraq?

How do you sleep? How can we stop this? How dare we debate Muslims' attitudes to us when we are doing this to them?

oh dear happy daddy...

can't believe you buy the 'france, germany, russia only voted against the war because of their oil deals ' tripe put about by neoconservatives.

who else had those oil deals? hmmm...let me see.....of course there weren't any US oil corps hard at work shifting iraqi oil were there?

its complete horseshit .

does it occur to you they may just have voted against an invasion to find WMD (lest we forget) because they felt- gasp- it ought to have a UN resolution behind it? and ...er...oh dear..whats this? so did the attorney general until he got told what to 'think'

toodarnhot no need for that blue language

and here's charles clarke on the news telling us we need our human rights curtailed (they can send anyone they deem unsavoury out of the country) in the aftermath of london. they didn't do this in WW2 did they????

Invading Iraq has been a disaster

and we were warned at the very time that Blair and Bush were lying their way into this illegal war that invading Iraq would put us at greater risk of terrorism.

and it has.

which is painfully ironic given that one of the many utterly spurious reasons we were given for the invasion was to protect us from terrorists

if i had voted for blair i would be keeping very quiet about it right now.

Frankly, I think the most important thing is that poor CD has had to change her holiday plans because of all these inconvenient suicide bombers. Don't they realise that she and Mr CD work bloody hard all year and don't need to have this additional stress?

Don't know why you're laughing - the food in Lefkas is probably crap in comparison to Turkey.

toodarnhot, so you really believe that france, germany and russia are whiter than white and that we and the US are not?

I never said that we are perfect, read my comments regarding our foreign policies. To say that this is all about Iraq is too simplistic, though.

I feel that the Iraq war is pretty indefensible. We should never have been there - we should never have been puppets to the US's manic actions.

I don't give any credit to the Iraq Goverment which doesn't even seem to tie its own shoelaces. I never mentioned them. And the US occupying forces(and UK don't forget) do fight under the LOAC (laws of armed combat) and are governed by the Geneva Convention. Having a gentleman's agreement for how to fight a war is pretty ridiculous but what it does mean is that for one thing combatants should be easily definable in uniform for a start - which clearly Al Quaeda Bombers are not. One of the reaons for this is to help to protect civilians.

"and these 'smart bombs' which 'accidentally' kill tens of thousands of civilians are targetted at the man in the street...the man in the street who might , possibly be an "insurgent"...or a "terrorist" "

I am not sure if you are aware but LOAC demands that bombing is not indescriminate. Countries undertaking bomb attacks on places such as Falluja and other targets they believe to be full of enemy combatants / insurgents before the attack must warn the civilians (and by default the combatants) of thier intenton to bomb. This is done by for one thing flooding the area with leaflets in many languages stating thier intentions with regard to bombing the area as a warning - asking non combatants to leave telling them they have no wish to harm them. This was done, and warnings were given - which is a damn sight more than was done on the tube last thursday morning. I don't defend the casualties that were brought about by the bombing of falluja - I am a pacifist. I do not agree with aggression as a solution.

"torturing people to death is not very nice. whoever does it." No one said it was.

and i trust you are aware that the US forces used incendiary bombs to raise fallujah to the ground ....devices banned by the vast majority of countries. dead civilians in that scenario can hardly be described as 'accidental'. Are the incendiary devices you are referring to Incendigel? I am aware that this is basically a redesigned legal version of napalm / agent orange which was banned. That was used in places like the caves in afghanistan etc. As far as I am aware the devices used in attacks on connibations were thermobaric weapons designed to suck the oxygen from the air and kill the occupants whilst leaving the structures sound. These are not banned and are used after the proper repeated warnings flooded in to the area given days - sometimes weeks before the attacks.

'Inevitable' is more apt. I agree - in any war civilian casualties is inevitable - regretable and totally inexcusable, but then as I said I think war is inexcusable.

My post was not about not being as bad as the terrorists, but rather that the original post seemed to lend an air of legality to the attacks on 7/7 when comparing it to the war in Iraq. I take no comfort from any part of this situation but rather search for ways to understand what is happening and what I as a citizen can do about it. I'd rather not sit back and congratulate myself on not being so bad, nor torture myself for existing as a Briton and find ways of making a difference even in some small way.

Emma

and here's charles clarke on the news telling us we need our human rights curtailed (they can send anyone they deem unsavoury out of the country) in the aftermath of london. they didn't do this in WW2 did they????

Sophable - in WWII hundreds of foreigners were impounded and imprisoned by the British Governement. These included germans living in the UK, people of German descent, Jews having fled fromt he Nazi Terror, Poles, Czechs etc etc. Things have really changed so very little.

If this is mostly about Iraq, how come most of the suicide bombers and Al-Qaeda recruits are from Pakistan and Afghanistan?

Sophable, WW2 proves that our attitudes have never changed. We bombed Dresden, a city with no military or tactical significance at all, killing millions of civilians. Our government knew exactly what Hitler was upto from before the war started but we chose to ignore it as it didn't affect us.

er....we did not kill millions at dresden- tens of thousands..the exact number is disputed.

and it did have military significance.

other than that i'm not sure what your point is.

toodarnhot, i apologise that i don't know the exact number. I have read from various sources that it had no military significance.

Rather than arguing over pedantic points, you could answer the post directed at you. If you wanted to.

My point was to answer sophable's question, "they didn't do this in WW2, did they?".

sharklet:

'And the US occupying forces(and UK don't forget) do fight under the LOAC (laws of armed combat) and are governed by the Geneva Convention. '

The LOAC you refer to have actually been adapted from israeli practice ....they are NOT governed by the geneva conventions.

Not sure if you saw the photos from abu ghraib but trust me, they contravene Geneva conventions on a number of fronts.

"I am not sure if you are aware but LOAC demands that bombing is not indescriminate. Countries undertaking bomb attacks on places such as Falluja and other targets they believe to be full of enemy combatants / insurgents before the attack must warn the civilians (and by default the combatants) of thier intenton to bomb. This is done by for one thing flooding the area with leaflets in many languages stating thier intentions with regard to bombing the area as a warning - asking non combatants to leave telling them they have no wish to harm them. This was done, and warnings were given"

you seem to be taking US pentagon press statements as some kind of statement of fact. remember these were the people who brought us the Jessica Lynch story . The Red Cross, HRW and numerous independent - yes, not embedded journalists- have documented that what you say abolut Fallujah is...how can i put this politely...utter nonsense

"* Are the incendiary devices you are referring to Incendigel?"

No- the mark 77 indendiary bomb: an UNGUIDED weapon....pray do explain how one uses an UNGUIDED weapon weighing 500 pounds on a city where tens of thousands of people were trapped by a cordon of 'coalition' forces in any way that is NOT indiscriminate.

do you work for Rumsfelds press office?

"My post was not about not being as bad as the terrorists, but rather that the original post seemed to lend an air of legality to the attacks on 7/7 when comparing it to the war in Iraq."

there was no suggestion that i can see that anyone suggested the london bombs were legal. please direct me to the quote that says that?

yes, the war in Iraq was illegal too as you rightly acknowledge but you seem to think that because the military tell us 'we don't target hosiptals' means that it was a mistake that every single hospital in fallujah was destroyed by US weaponry.

it was not acciental .

happy daddy- who said it was "mostly" about Iraq?

I dispute the assertion of your man Blair that it has nothing to do with Iraq.

and in case you had not noticed the most recent bombers did not come from newly , ahem "democratic' afghanistan or - our ally in the war on terror- pakistan.

toodarnhot, may i ask if you have an academic or political background? You seem very knowledgable on this subject.

I can't sleep at night for worrying about how we're going to buy food till the next paycheque and how we're going to be able to pay rent and basic bills.

I literally can't. It got so bad I had to see the GP and take tranquilisers. I have to go see a psychiatrist for panic attacks and depression. I'm 4.5 months pregnant as well.

oh, are you not earning much expatinscotland

I see, I voted Blair, therefore I support the war wholeheartedly? If you say so, it must be true.

Erm, sophables opening post was about Iraq being the cause. I'm merely saying that it's not the only reason by a long chalk.

One of the london bombers spent time in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden's base has been Afghanistan and Pakistan for some time now.

"toodarnhot, so you really believe that france, germany and russia are whiter than white and that we and the US are not?
."

no...again you seem to have the urge to believe that there are only two positions: slavish support for Bush and Blair, or blind allegiance to chirac/schroeder/putin

is it conceivable there could be more than two positions

"I never said that we are perfect, read my comments regarding our foreign policies. To say that this is all about Iraq is too simplistic, though"

ok- well thats good- for a moment i thought you'd voted for Blair..

whats that?

you did?

my deepest sympathies.

and there was me thinking you were arguing that the only reason germany france and russia opposed the war was their own oil interests.

oh...hang on...you did.

"Bin Laden's base has been Afghanistan and Pakistan for some time now."

yes thats right.

good that we're devoting our military resources to disarming saddam and making safe all those WMD in Iraq then, right? thats really showed bin laden whats what hasn't it?

and no i do not hve a opolitical background. just possession of critical faculties.

£13,200 gross for a family of 3 in Edinburgh. That's below poverty line after tax and NI. We had our tax credits yanked b/c of an error on their part - of which we have proof - but we must go thru the appeals process first.

It still hasn't been determined if DD is neurotypical or if her gross motor skills are attributable to a disability.

So no, not sleeping well at night and can't take full dose of tranqs as pregnant.

For pity's sake, you sound like Michael Moore now.

I don't believe that there are only two positions but you utterly refuted the french/german/russian argument in favour of their opposition to WMD. Your argument is just as flawed as mine, at least have the decency to admit that.

Yes, I voted Blair. Shoot me now. Oh sorry, I happen to agree with his policies for a better Britain. Can I disagree with the war in Iraq, too? I think I can. Is that ok with you?