What about the others?

In some states, mate. As for prime ministers - ain't known a politician yet who don't indulge in terminological inexactitudes.

Alan mate your response is an extraordinary reflection of the way the great British public try to gloss over the enormity of Blair's war crimes. If he'd lied about agriculture policy or fishing rights, that would have been one thing, but he lied about the reasons for waging war and as a result tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of people have died unnecessarily. Imagine for one moment if it had been the other way round. Suppose Saddam had attacked Britain on the basis of false claims and tens of thousands of Brits had died. I somehow don't think you'd be dismissing Saddam's lies quite so glibly. Incidentally, Bush is supposed to be a Texan and they certainly have the death penalty there. In Texas they start to get withdrawal symptoms if they haven't executed someone for more than a few days.

I see we have a new troll name. Afraid to be identified are we?

I do get tired of the harping on about politicians and their lies, especially about Iraq. Was it wrong to invade? Yes. Were we lied to about the reasons? Yes. Can the voting public do anything about it? Yes. Vote the idiots out. That's what democracies do. But move on and find something new to bitch about! This topic is as old as my granny's knickers. Sheesh.

What an extraordinary argument Archergirl. Half a million people have died unnecessarily because of lies told by Bush and Blair and hey that's so 2003, get over it, whatever. And why stop there? Six million Jews and goodness knows how many disabled people, gays and Gypsies were murdered by Hitler and that was even further back in history. For goodness' sake it's time we stopped harping on about the holocaust. Let's talk about something important like the January sales. I'm not a troll by the way Missi. I would have thought it was fairly obvious who I am. I just thought I'd use a seasonal variant of my name for a few days. Christmas SPIRIT and all that.

Arseygurl, 'Was it wrong to invade? Yes' Well that's just your opinion, and no doubt that of many more, but there are those that believe it was right. 'Were we lied to about the reasons? Yes.' That's debatable. It was only lying if those giving the reasons knew they were lying, if they believed at the time they were telling the truth they are only guilty of being wrong, and even that's just a maybe. The fact that the so-called WMD as specified by those that were against the war were not found doesn't mean they didn't exist. Bruce, an unidentified user whose profile says they've been a member for three hours, who has no writing on the site is always going to be labelled a troll. I knew it was a regular but can't be arsed to play games. 'Half a million people have died...because of lies told by Bush and Blair' Really? And where did you get those figures from? (I disagree that any deaths were the result of 'lies' anyway) Prior to the removal of Hussein up to 2 million indigenous people died as a result of HIS actions, but then they were Iraqis/Iranians/Kuwaitis so that doesn't matter does it? (Figures published in the national press, several newspapers of all persuasions) '... it's time we stopped harping on about the holocaust ..' Oh no it isn't, it's important that successive generations know what the result of religious hatred can be. Quite apart from the fact that the holocaust is so recent as to not even be categorised as 'history'. There are many many living people who survived it and lost family and friends in it. It's bordering on insulting to say 'stop harping on about it' or forget it and move on. To suggest that the January sales are more important is shallow and less than I'd expect from an educated person.

What would be extraordinary would be if someone like you, who carps on and on about how bad everything is and how mean and evil our 'great leaders' are, etc. ad infinitum, wah wah, actually had anything new to say about it, or, better yet, came up with a feasible and enactable solution to these troubles. Instead, you jump on the reactionary bandwagon and wave your little banner like everyone else. How original. The human story is a continuum of violence and strife, and has been since before such things were recorded. I don't know why people like you continue to be surprised by such things, as if calling for the heads of the current leaders will make one whit of difference in the big picture. The next leaders might do things differently, but, if we look at the history of such revolutions, probably not. My suggestion to you would be to try not getting so wound up about your own powerlessness, try to relax, and find something nice to wear in the sales to lighten your mood. *kiss*

' ... how mean and evil our 'great leaders' are.. ' Arsey, you really make me grin. I presume by our 'great' leaders you're referring to Bush/Blair. I don't actually think either of them are mean or evil, and I'm pretty sure I've never claimed they were. Surely you're mistaking me for yourself! Bush appears to me to be a bit stupid and Blair a bit misguided at times, but that's just a personal opinion, much the same as everyone else's here. Why, they're BOTH God-fearing chuch-goers, and deeply religious men! ' ...as if calling for the heads of the current leaders will make one whit of difference in the big picture... ' I have this theory that if the world's population can be convinced that becoming a tyrant will not be tolerated and will lead to their overthow and execution, it becomes a lot less likely that they'll tread that path in the first place. Now that may seem a little far-fetched but it'd be a start. THAT is why I think it's important that evil bastards like Hussein and Mugabe are brought to book. Your pessimism and inability to see past the end of your nose does nothing to help the situation Tim, it's my prerogative to be as daft as the next person. Dunno about irony by-pass, but I use the Chelmsford by-pass regularly.

For a moment I too thought you were being serious with all that guff about bandwagons and banners Archergirl. It seems Missi and I have both had an irony bypass. Nice one. George how could you think I was being anything other than sarcastic in my statement about the holocaust or the January sales. Or was that you being doubly ironic? I'm all official now. I've changed my username - adding an extra 'o' - so no one can accuse me of being a troll.

It was right to invade Iraq - but people needn't die. Michael Persinger and his work with electrodes may be the key to a future without death during warfare. Just trip them out with some electromagnetic stimulation, take over, and bob's your pet dinosaur. We're still living in pretty childish times regards humanity - right missi?! ;) There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

Missi, believe it or not I was replying to Bruce, not you, as your message somehow got completely 'by-passed' on my computer along with the irony; maybe you posted it while I was typing... I do think there are other feasible solutions besides warfare, but sadly most people in power are too myopic and self-serving to seriously consider other things. Diplomacy is given lip-service, but the outcome always seems to tip toward aggression, as it appears to be more financially amenable for a select few.

If you want something done about Mugabe then you'd better hope that Zimbabwe is suddenly found to be full of oil, or some other commodity which America desperately wants.

"I have this theory that if the world's population can be convinced that becoming a tyrant will not be tolerated and will lead to their overthow and execution, it becomes a lot less likely that bthey'll tread that path in the first place. Now that may seem a little far-fetched but it'd be a start. THAT is why I think it's important that evil bastards like Hussein and Mugabe are brought to book." Someone's evil bastard is someone else's hero. Whether or not Saddam deserved to be executed, he wasn't executed under some divine law of natural justice for being an evil bastard, he was executed because he lost a war. He lost a war and the people who won the war allowed power to be transferred to people who hated him. In this case, I think their hatred was justified but this was largely irrelevent to the outcome. In the same way that the Nazi leaders - who lost - were executed and Stalin - who won - wasn't. I'm not shedding any tears for Saddam but the reality is that bad tactical judgements rather than their level of badness is the main reason why tyrants have been executed in the past and will be in the future.

Galtiere (sp) also lost a war, but he wasn't executed for it. Not all losers are executed, Napoleon for instance was sent on holiday to a tropical paradise that people would pay hundreds of pounds to visit these days. There are many more examples of 'losers' being treated no worse than our cricket team will be on their return from the appalling display of sporting incompetence they've been indulging in recently. Hussein's execution wasn't really because he lost a war, but because he was found guilty of crimes against humanity. Now I realise that starting any war could be construed as a crime against humanity but as long as it's fought according to the 'rules' it's seen as more of a difference of opinion than a crime.

I wasn't suggesting that it's a universal principle that leaders who lose wars get executed - I was arguing that the decisive factor in leaders who get executed, getting executed is that they've lost a war, rather than that they've committed crimes against humanity. I'm not really suggesting that losing war's key thing, though. The key thing is losing power - once they've lost power, any leader who ruled without consent and accountability is likely to be in a pretty sticky situation. The overrall point being that I don't think the example of Saddam will discourage brutal tyrants from being brutal tyrants, it's more likely to reinforce their desire not to loosen their grip on power under any circumstances.

It will also make them think very clearly about the likely result if they are ousted. I'm not convinced you're right about the decisive factor either. Tyrants like Hussein cannot survive as long as he did if the UN outlaws his kind of regime and enforces the prohibition.. I've said that many times before, and I believe it's still our best chance of achieving peace world-wide. I also believe that the UN will NEVER take any such action, because it's nothing more than a fucking 'boys club' for time-served politicians. It has neither the will nor the guts or support for anything other than a verbal slap on the wrists.