Partly Facetious: do investigations achieve much?

"Chaudhry has ruled out an investigation on Kargil."
"Why?"
"I think because he thinks Musharraf would not like an investigation."
"That's it! Is that the only reason?"
"Yes, I guess."
"Personally I think, have always thought actually, that investigations alone can help resolve issues once and for all. I mean if we do have an investigation on Kargil then all issues, claims and counter claims relating to it can be resolved. I don't think there will then remain any reason to blame any one individual or one institution or the system in place at the time."
"I don't think investigations resolve anything. I mean we had the Hutton inquiry and then Poodle was forced to have the Butler inquiry and yet British public opinion is deeply divisive."
"No, that's not quite true. American opinion is deeply divisive but the majority of the British public is opposed to the decision taken by their Prime Minister taking them to war in Iraq."
"Proves my point - that investigations don't achieve too much."
"And yet these two countries held investigations so why can't we?"
"They were forced to. See they have the older version of democracy while we have the new and improved kind."
"Chaudhry says that he was party to the briefings given by Musharraf to Nawaz and that he would..."
"What? Never lie for Musharraf? By the way what did Chaudhry say about the charge...?"
"Be careful - he may not be the President but he has a car that has the flag in front of it and..."
"Well, if you put it that way..."
"I do put it that way."
"Then I have nothing to say to you except to reiterate that it is always advisable to hold an independent inquiry and..."
"And what?"
"Well, it's not as if you can't manipulate it or dismiss its findings."
"Yep, as the case was in the UK and US respectively."