It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: UK and US Leaders Acted Like Nazi War Criminals

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Scott Ritter, former chief weapons inspector for the UN, said President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair acted like Nazi war criminals in ordering the invasion of Iraq. Ritter said this in an address at the Chatham House think tank in London.
 



www.telegraph.co.uk
A former chief UN weapons inspector has compared Prime Minister Tony Blair and George W Bush, the American president, to the Nazi war criminals who started the Second World War.

Scott Ritter, a former US marine, said the US and Britain's "aggressive warfare" in Iraq was similar to German actions in Europe 66 years ago.

"Both these men could be pulled up as war criminals for engaging in actions that we condemned Germany in 1946 for doing the same thing," he said.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Considering the Telegraph is publishing this article they must think it has some merit, or has the Telegraph become a tabloid rag?

Another similiar article ran the following day in the Telegraph:
British and American leaders likened to Nazi war criminals

Related News Links:
www.axisoflogic.com

[edit on 10-10-2005 by Regenmacher]




posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I don't think we can be exactly called Nazi's yet, seeing as we havn't exterminated millions of innocent people..

[edit on 10-10-2005 by AgentSmith]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Exterminating millions is not necessary to classified a war criminal.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Considering the Telegraph is publishing this article they must think it has some merit, or has the Telegraph become a tabloid rag?


I'm sure the quote from Ritter reported by the Telegraph is correct, but that's not the real question. The question is how credible is Scott Ritter...I'd say not at all.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Of course you don't like Scott Ritter, he thinks for himself and doesn't worship the ground Bush walks on.

Now for the free thinkers, this is funny, and while Hitler Jr hasn't killed millions he has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civillians both here and in Iraq. How many died because we wouldn't use FLu Vaccine from Canada until the one that was suppose to be clean was found dirty? How many died from Katrina? According to FuneralGate less then a 1,000, credible people say a hell of alot more due to FuneralGate checking less then 20% of the houses in NO and not even looking for bodies in the lake, river, or ocean. It's like searching for OBL in Afganistan yet you only search 10% of Afganistan before saying he isn't there. How many died in Iraq from us using illegal weapons on a populated city of women and children?



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Full Metal
Of course you don't like Scott Ritter, he thinks for himself and doesn't worship the ground Bush walks on.


Thinks for himself? Really? I thought he was bought and paid for by Saddam Hussein:

powerlineblog.com...



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I'm sick of this anti war bull crap. Since when does a country NOT have a right to protect itself? Saddam needed to be put out of power, for OUR good not just the Iraqi's that can't stand up for themselves and control their own destiny.....

As far as Syria and Iran goes, same thing....In case your not aware, they are THREATS to the US and most of the rest of the world. Whether you believe they have WMD's or not they still host and encourage extreme radical's who have no other thought than destroying the "non holy" and pushing the ideals of radical islam..... I'm not converting.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   
well WHAT do you make of the similar actions? I mean so what if he's a turdsandwhich he's just playing the role of mr. obvious.


According to the CIA's Duelfer's Report Iraq:

§ HAD NO WMD’s.

§ “had no . . . strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions” ended.

§ Iraq failed “to acquire long range Iraq’s nuclear program ended in 1991 following the Gulf War.

§ “Iraq unilaterally destroyed is undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter.”

§ In spite of exhaustive investigation, ISG found no evidence that Iraq possessed, or was developing BW agent product systems mounted on road vehicles or railway wagons.”




those damn commies always burning down mein reichstag!
external image


For example, in his address to the nation Bush said the intelligence “leaves no doubt that . . . Iraq . . . continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”



All we wanted was like one warhead or maybe a bucket of some riccin, instead we just get more thin air.

durka durka jihadurka

If we're lucky we'll soon have a nice wedge carved into central asia!



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Aimlessly- What an appropriate title! When did Saddam attack us? Oh, I know- we seek out the terrorists in whatever country we feel we must. We will occupy whatever country whose government opposes our domination, and if they resist the citizenry become.....insurgents! Then we have license to maim and kill at will in the name of ...democracy

Your view seems very narrow. Do you have children? If so, do you feel that what we are doing in the middle east is a great enough cause for them to sacrifice their lives? If so, please send them, because I will not send mine!



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by aimlessly
I'm sick of this anti war bull crap. Since when does a country NOT have a right to protect itself? Saddam needed to be put out of power, for OUR good not just the Iraqi's that can't stand up for themselves and control their own destiny.....



This is the lie that has so many in its grasp. I'm sick of people not willing to see they have made a mistake and put a liar in office.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by aimlessly
I'm sick of this anti war bull crap. Since when does a country NOT have a right to protect itself? Saddam needed to be put out of power, for OUR good not just the Iraqi's that can't stand up for themselves and control their own destiny.....

As far as Syria and Iran goes, same thing....In case your not aware, they are THREATS to the US and most of the rest of the world. Whether you believe they have WMD's or not they still host and encourage extreme radical's who have no other thought than destroying the "non holy" and pushing the ideals of radical islam..... I'm not converting.





How exactly was Iraq a danger to anyone? Perhaps if you think back to 1991 you'd recall us going in there and blowing the crap out of their dated tanks.

Did they hide this awesome army along with their wmd just to give us a good mindfornication?

But I am with you on religious extremist, OF all faiths need to be purged.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
true to an extent...

as agent smith pointed out
it cannot be a direct comparison unless we remove one huge variable...
the Holocaust...

take the holocaust away, and you have a very appropriate analogy.

you see the same propagandized hate of a cuture (jew/arab)
you see the same illegal methods of influence upon a country (attack)
you see the same false patriotism/fascism that results from the buildup to war.

BUT... that would also be true of most wars, and most military attacks since WW2.

[edit on 10-10-2005 by LazarusTheLong]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Full Metal
Of course you don't like Scott Ritter, he thinks for himself and doesn't worship the ground Bush walks on.



Thinks for himself? Really? I thought he was bought and paid for by Saddam Hussein:

powerlineblog.com...


george galloway, too(chuckle)? and jim mcdermott(i don't know who he is, but i'll guarantee he's a vocal proponent of stopping the madness)?

i'm surprised ghandi's not on that list.

ever seen one of those movies where the hero is constantly pursued by BOTH sides of the dialectic. it is always because this archetype is the one of ultimate fidelity. it takes great courage to stand against the tide of the massive, dumb animal known as humanity. presidents are not the only ones who can make a crisp decision in a maelstrom of conflict. the truth is not partisan.
if the devil himself offered me the power to propogate what i KNEW to be true, and that particular truth could stop world war three, i would TAKE the offer and spend eternity in hell to save the world from the totalitarian takeover(by, ironically, SATANISTS).

(of course, the devil knows, this is rhetoric and old sam can't have my soul as it's already spoken for)



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
true to an extent...

as agent smith pointed out
it cannot be a direct comparison unless we remove one huge variable...
the Holocaust...

take the holocaust away, and you have a very appropriate analogy.

you see the same propagandized hate of a cuture (jew/arab)
you see the same illegal methods of influence upon a country (attack)
you see the same false patriotism/fascism that results from the buildup to war.

BUT... that would also be true of most wars, and most military attacks since WW2 also...


Well, the Nazi party came to power 5 years before annexing Austria, 6 years before WW2 officially began. Give them time, it's early.


Am I getting your point Laz?



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   
even so, one must take a serious look at the 'holocaust' if he/she is going to put stock in it.

dont label me anti-semite just yet, better yet - go look up how 'semite' is defined - and you're just barely scratching the surface.

granted, horrible horrible things happened to jewish people during the second world war, but then again, the victors get to write the history...

i could post links galore, but reading is just reading - and eventually one chooses to trust the source. my trust has eliminated pretty much every major 'truth' perpetrated upon humanity in the last century or so... 6 million?

bah

edit; in relation to this story however, holocaust or not, bush and blaire share this in common with nazis of old: manufactured consent.

[edit on 10-10-2005 by lost]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   
So, let's say we didn't go into Iraq. We turn a blind eye to the middle east, as we have for soooooooo many years, what do you think would be happening now?

Do you think the rose colored glasses that many like to wear will keep the peace?

Personally i feel that this war was a long time coming. Yes it's for oil, yes it's for freedom, yes it is for just purging the world of some really sick pukes that only understand warfare. They don't understand diplomacy, let's sit down and talk out our differences, right. That will happen.

There are some really good links and discussions that i have found on other threads here on ats that discuss what i feel is the real reason for this war. It has to do with the radical islamic belief and their belief of world domination. I don't have the time right now to find the threads but they are worth reading.

We could have let it go on. We could have just said ok saddam, fine you don't want the inspectors in? Well, we won't bother you anymore. I think that would have been a more devestating and more drastic loss of life than we have now.

The big picture is what i am concerned about. I don't care if it is President Bush, Gore (although i'm glad it wasn't) Kerry or whoever may be in office. This is going to go on for many years and span many presidents if it is done correctly.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Comparing the Nazi's to Bush is shear fantasy!
If the Nazi's had what Bush has under his command i would give them 4 months tops to take over the world! Bush is an insult to be called a Nazi, he is too dumb, too indisciplined and too medicore to even stand in the presence of Hitler. Hitler wouldnt have appionted Bush as even a peon in the Reichstag forget a postion of power.
Bush is similar to hitler! Bah! thats a joke!

Hitler was much more forcefull and damn intelligent. If hitler werealive and this was his predicament, nations would literally beg to be taken over and the whole world would join in with the resources he had. Bush is a child compared to hitler.
The tribune sure has no idea what the Nazi's were like if they can compare Bush and blair to hitler !
BTW: I dont admire hitler!



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by aimlessly
So, let's say we didn't go into Iraq. We turn a blind eye to the middle east, as we have for soooooooo many years, what do you think would be happening now?

Do you think the rose colored glasses that many like to wear will keep the peace?

Personally i feel that this war was a long time coming. Yes it's for oil, yes it's for freedom, yes it is for just purging the world of some really sick pukes that only understand warfare. They don't understand diplomacy, let's sit down and talk out our differences, right. That will happen.


So giving Saddam WMDs back in the 80s, and aiding Arab Rebels in Afrganistan so they could fight agaisnt the Soviets, and giving millions of dollars of Military Aid to Isreal was "turning a blind eye to the middle east"?

Now we are paying the price for those actions. Al-queda performed a terrorist action on US soil killing thousands, there is war and unrest in Isreal, and now Iraq has become a quagmire because of the WMD that we gave saddam . Yes people in Iraq were opessed, but those living there had learned how to survived under the dictator by not rocking the boat. But taking the leadership out of power, releasing thousands of former soilders to fend for themselves while NOT DOING A THING to prevent looting by said former leadership and military.

THe Iraqi's did not welcome the US with open arms, and in fact Iraq is worse off now then it was under saddam. The United States leadership particualr the WHite house administartion isn't much better then the "sick pukes" that were replaced. The ones in the US just look a lot better nad speak english



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Intrepid...
We can only hope that they never start rounding up muslims...
nah... it hasn't been long enough to forget that lesson from history..

INSTEAD there will be another method of "restoring our saftey" since that is supposed to be what this is all about...



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
So does "paying the price" mean we can't defend? And yes i do believe to defend you sometimes have to be preemptive.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join