(UK) Iraq damages cases: Supreme Court rules families can sue
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by maddezmom (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: BBC
Families of soldiers killed in Iraq can pursue damages against the government, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Legal action was brought by relatives of three men killed by roadside bombs while in Snatch Land Rovers and another killed while in a Challenger tank.
The judges ruled the families could make damages claims under human rights legislation and sue for negligence.
The defence secretary has said the ruling could make it "more difficult for troops to carry out operations".
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22967853
= new reply since forum marked as read
How embarrassing.
If precedent is set... OMG! Think of it! It could very well be a strategy to end unjust wars.
But then most wars are unjust.
St. Augustine was wrong when he wrote "Just War Theory". When he wrote it he used information that later was found to be innaccurate. But even by the criteria used to establish the idea of a "Just War"... it does not hold water. Look at the reasons given for most wars, and it is easy to demonstrate that they are fallaceous.
Unless attacked, we have no good reasons for war. Most wars are waged to make money for super rich corporations. We bleed our young and ruin them forever.... to make corporations more money. Then we essentially abandon our warriors and turn our backs on them.
Just war?
What about a just socieity?!
St. Augustine was quite a guy. But he was as wrong then as he is now.
