Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war criminals

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10704
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war criminals

Post by Elfdart »

The Guardian
Why I had no choice but to spurn Tony Blair

I couldn't sit with someone who justified the invasion of Iraq with a lie


The immorality of the United States and Great Britain's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.

Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us.

If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth? Days before George W Bush and Tony Blair ordered the invasion of Iraq, I called the White House and spoke to Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser, to urge that United Nations weapons inspectors be given more time to confirm or deny the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Should they be able to confirm finding such weapons, I argued, dismantling the threat would have the support of virtually the entire world. Ms Rice demurred, saying there was too much risk and the president would not postpone any longer.

On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers' circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush's chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.

On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague.

But even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?

Leadership and morality are indivisible. Good leaders are the custodians of morality. The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level.

If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?

My appeal to Mr Blair is not to talk about leadership, but to demonstrate it. You are a member of our family, God's family. You are made for goodness, for honesty, for morality, for love; so are our brothers and sisters in Iraq, in the US, in Syria, in Israel and Iran.

I did not deem it appropriate to have this discussion at the Discovery Invest Leadership Summit in Johannesburg last week. As the date drew nearer, I felt an increasingly profound sense of discomfort about attending a summit on "leadership" with Mr Blair. I extend my humblest and sincerest apologies to Discovery, the summit organisers, the speakers and delegates for the lateness of my decision not to attend.
Of course Blair was asking to be snubbed because unlike Bush or Cheney, he lacks the good sense to stay out of the public eye. My only disagreement with any part of Tutu's article is the part about how the war in Iraq "has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history." He's old enough to remember Vietnam and other wars which were worse on that score, but otherwise his point still stands: Tony Blair and the other war whores need to tried for what they did.

The way Desmond Tutu denounced Blair and Bush really brightened my day. The only way this article could have been better is if he announced he was running for President:



Tutu 2012!
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Flagg »

Good on him. Of course none of them will ever be tried, but fighting the good fight is always a good thing in my book.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Lord Pounder
Pretty Hate Machine
Posts: 9695
Joined: 2002-11-19 04:40pm
Location: Belfast, unfortunately
Contact:

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Lord Pounder »

I was lucky enough to meet Desmond Tutu once, a very charming and insightful man. In this case he is also bang on the money. An entire generation of young men and women have been decimated by the actions of Bush and Blair. Can anyone in here from America or the UK honestly say they have not been effected. One of my friends from high school was killed by an IED in Afghanistan, he was so badly blown up his parents couldn't see him one last time to say goodbye. These are the crimes Bush and Blair are guilty of.
RIP Yosemite Bear
Gone, Never Forgotten
Channel72
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2010-02-03 05:28pm
Location: New York

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Channel72 »

Christ, I've been having this same conversation since the mid-2000s when it became patently obvious that there were no WMDs in Iraq. I'd say that Bush and Blair are not exactly equivalent to someone like Mugabe. The problem is how you define a "lie". Yes, you can argue that it's all hair-splitting - but that hair-splitting actually matters in this case.

The truth is, there's no absolute prima facie evidence that Bush lied about WMDs. The best (worst) you can say is that he had blinders on the whole time, coming down with a severe case of selection-bias, and ignored all evidence which ran contrary to the case he was building against Saddam Hussein. You can't really accuse him of outright lying, (even if you sincerely believe he was), or fabricating evidence or anything. Sure, he used flimsy evidence, but nobody can prove it was fabricated. And the truth is it probably wasn't fabricated; it was just what Bush wanted to hear. It's very likely he honestly thought that he'd be vindicated by stockpiles of chemical weapons, since at least there is blatant evidence (in the form of a few thousand dead Kurds) that Saddam Hussein at least used to have chemical weapons. Bush might have actually believed his own propaganda, and just ignored all evidence to the contrary via a combination of wishful thinking and selection-bias.

Either way, he's an asshole. But objectively speaking, you can't accuse him of outright lying in a legal sense, even if you sincerely want to scream "Oh come on! You know he fucking lied about it!" This is why it's hard to really make a case he should be tried as a war criminal. People like Mugabe had tangible, provable human rights violations counting against them. Bush can just say "well, all the intelligence we gathered said Saddam was a clear threat. Guess we were wrong. Oops! But don't worry, he was a total asshole anyway, so it's good we invaded."
Grumman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2488
Joined: 2011-12-10 09:13am

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Grumman »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a closer fit with the concept of a "crime against peace", rather than a "war crime"?
User avatar
Magis
Padawan Learner
Posts: 226
Joined: 2010-06-17 02:50pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Magis »

The Guardian
The immorality of the United States and Great Britain's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.
Bolding mine.

Is this guy fucking nuts? To a greater extent than any other conflict in history?! More than the Nazi invasion of Poland? Tutu discredits himself entirely with that statement - too bad it's the very first he made. Then again, it did set the tone for the equally fatuous remainder of his article.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10704
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Elfdart »

Magis wrote:The Guardian
The immorality of the United States and Great Britain's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.
Bolding mine.

Is this guy fucking nuts? To a greater extent than any other conflict in history?! More than the Nazi invasion of Poland? Tutu discredits himself entirely with that statement - too bad it's the very first he made. Then again, it did set the tone for the equally fatuous remainder of his article.
The world was already destabilized in 1939. Unless you think the invasions of Spain, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia and China don't count. Nice try, jackass.
:wanker:
Barlestone
Redshirt
Posts: 15
Joined: 2011-05-29 01:52am
Location: Here

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Barlestone »

WWI, then? The point still stands. The Iraq war was bad, but it definitely wasn't the worst war in human history, either in terms of gross destruction or the resulting destabilization. This kind of hyperbole is bad for two reasons: firstly, it diminishes the credibility of the speaker, secondly, it reinforces the harmful notion that a problem must be the uniquely terrible to be worth addressing. While I agree with the general sentiment of Tutu's speech, I think it would have been improved by the removal of the first sentence.
Sapere Aude
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Jub »

Barlestone wrote:WWI, then? The point still stands. The Iraq war was bad, but it definitely wasn't the worst war in human history, either in terms of gross destruction or the resulting destabilization. This kind of hyperbole is bad for two reasons: firstly, it diminishes the credibility of the speaker, secondly, it reinforces the harmful notion that a problem must be the uniquely terrible to be worth addressing. While I agree with the general sentiment of Tutu's speech, I think it would have been improved by the removal of the first sentence.
Europe wasn't much more stable leading up to WWI, but that's a topic for the history forum.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10704
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Elfdart »

Uh yeah, Europe in 1914 was really stable. That's why the whole place went up in flames after an assassination.
Barlestone wrote:WWI, then? The point still stands.
You think?
The Iraq war was bad, but it definitely wasn't the worst war in human history, either in terms of gross destruction or the resulting destabilization.
Really?
This kind of hyperbole is bad for two reasons: firstly, it diminishes the credibility of the speaker, secondly, it reinforces the harmful notion that a problem must be the uniquely terrible to be worth addressing.


Hyperbole diminishes his credibility? Get da fuck outta here! [/ Brooklyn accent]

While I agree with the general sentiment of Tutu's speech,


Funny, considering the amount of concern-trolling about one sentence.
I think it would have been improved by the removal of the first sentence.
Why don't you ask him if you can write for him?
Barlestone
Redshirt
Posts: 15
Joined: 2011-05-29 01:52am
Location: Here

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Barlestone »

Jub wrote:Europe wasn't much more stable leading up to WWI, but that's a topic for the history forum.
Sure, we can debate specifics another time. My point is that history is a pretty big place, and superlatives shouldn't be tossed around casually.

Edit: added quote to make clear who I was responding to.
Sapere Aude
Zinegata
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2482
Joined: 2010-06-21 09:04am

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Zinegata »

Jub wrote:
Barlestone wrote:WWI, then? The point still stands. The Iraq war was bad, but it definitely wasn't the worst war in human history, either in terms of gross destruction or the resulting destabilization. This kind of hyperbole is bad for two reasons: firstly, it diminishes the credibility of the speaker, secondly, it reinforces the harmful notion that a problem must be the uniquely terrible to be worth addressing. While I agree with the general sentiment of Tutu's speech, I think it would have been improved by the removal of the first sentence.
Europe wasn't much more stable leading up to WWI, but that's a topic for the history forum.
World War 1 ended up with several outright revolutions - such as the Russian Revolution in 1917 which was followed by a very bloody Civil War. Let's not understate the damaging effects it had for the sake of "Iraq War bad!" hysteria.

Facts are simple: Saying that the Iraq War was the most divisive in world history is indeed a wee bit of an exaggeration. In living memory for this generation though, you can make the case that it is; which is pretty damn bad.
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Stark »

Tutu didn't say it was 'the worst war in human history'. He said it polarised the world more than any other war. He's still probably wrong, but it sure will shape the world for the next few decades.
Zinegata
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2482
Joined: 2010-06-21 09:04am

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Zinegata »

Stark wrote:Tutu didn't say it was 'the worst war in human history'. He said it polarised the world more than any other war. He's still probably wrong, but it sure will shape the world for the next few decades.
This is why I cited the Russian Civil War as a direct result of WW1. 'Cause you know, Civil Wars are polarising/divisive for a country? Plus it had a lot of terrible effects that caused the world to be a much more paranoid place? (which unfortunately gets forgotten by people)

Otherwise I'd be citing body counts :P

Iraq is in the running for the most divisive/polarising for our generation though, yes.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Thanas »

Channel72 wrote:Christ, I've been having this same conversation since the mid-2000s when it became patently obvious that there were no WMDs in Iraq. I'd say that Bush and Blair are not exactly equivalent to someone like Mugabe. The problem is how you define a "lie". Yes, you can argue that it's all hair-splitting - but that hair-splitting actually matters in this case.

The truth is, there's no absolute prima facie evidence that Bush lied about WMDs. The best (worst) you can say is that he had blinders on the whole time, coming down with a severe case of selection-bias, and ignored all evidence which ran contrary to the case he was building against Saddam Hussein. You can't really accuse him of outright lying, (even if you sincerely believe he was), or fabricating evidence or anything. Sure, he used flimsy evidence, but nobody can prove it was fabricated. And the truth is it probably wasn't fabricated; it was just what Bush wanted to hear. It's very likely he honestly thought that he'd be vindicated by stockpiles of chemical weapons, since at least there is blatant evidence (in the form of a few thousand dead Kurds) that Saddam Hussein at least used to have chemical weapons. Bush might have actually believed his own propaganda, and just ignored all evidence to the contrary via a combination of wishful thinking and selection-bias.

Either way, he's an asshole. But objectively speaking, you can't accuse him of outright lying in a legal sense, even if you sincerely want to scream "Oh come on! You know he fucking lied about it!" This is why it's hard to really make a case he should be tried as a war criminal. People like Mugabe had tangible, provable human rights violations counting against them. Bush can just say "well, all the intelligence we gathered said Saddam was a clear threat. Guess we were wrong. Oops! But don't worry, he was a total asshole anyway, so it's good we invaded."
This is a pretty bad opinion to have especially considering we know just how expansive the witchhunt in the analyst areas were, weeding out anybody who did not come to the conclusion of "INVASION. NOW". Even moreso, the human rights violations that appeared before, during and after the invasion are pretty much chronicled, so I don't know where you get the "no tangible provable human rights violations" crap from.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by K. A. Pital »

If you can't call Yellowcake fabricated evidence, then your standards for real evidence are simply nonexistent.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
User avatar
Spoonist
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2405
Joined: 2002-09-20 11:15am

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Spoonist »

I especially disliked the with us or against us that made them character assassinate Hans Blix before the war just because he was right. And then the Joseph and Valerie Wilson shit.
Channel72
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2010-02-03 05:28pm
Location: New York

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Channel72 »

Thanas wrote:This is a pretty bad opinion to have especially considering we know just how expansive the witchhunt in the analyst areas were, weeding out anybody who did not come to the conclusion of "INVASION. NOW".
Yeah, but my point is that at best this gives you evidence of severe selection-bias, not lies. I'm not an international lawyer, and I don't know if you could build a case for outright falsification here. But I doubt you are either, so all you're doing is giving me your opinion about how much you believe Bush lied.
Thanas wrote:Even moreso, the human rights violations that appeared before, during and after the invasion are pretty much chronicled, so I don't know where you get the "no tangible provable human rights violations" crap from.
Yes, I concede that. But the OP is more focused around the initial war cry being based on lies, rather than the ensuing waterboarding and other violations.
Stas Bush wrote:If you can't call Yellowcake fabricated evidence, then your standards for real evidence are simply nonexistent.
And how do you plan to prove the Bush administration knew it was fabricated? They just dismissed it as faulty intelligence.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Thanas »

Channel72 wrote:
Thanas wrote:This is a pretty bad opinion to have especially considering we know just how expansive the witchhunt in the analyst areas were, weeding out anybody who did not come to the conclusion of "INVASION. NOW".
Yeah, but my point is that at best this gives you evidence of severe selection-bias, not lies. I'm not an international lawyer, and I don't know if you could build a case for outright falsification here. But I doubt you are either, so all you're doing is giving me your opinion about how much you believe Bush lied.
They wanted a conclusion and then specifically sought out evidence that would only fit that specific conclusion they had arrived at beforehand. That is more than selection bias. That is falsifying arguments for war.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10704
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Elfdart »

It's like police or prosecutors building a case against a suspect, but discarding evidence that proves the suspect didn't do it.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10704
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Desmond Tutu: Blair & Bush should be tried as war crimin

Post by Elfdart »

Stas Bush wrote:If you can't call Yellowcake fabricated evidence, then your standards for real evidence are simply nonexistent.
It was also clear they were lying because in 2001 both Powell and Rice said Iraq wasn't a threat to anyone:

Post Reply