Then please to be explaining how it effects MY life? cos so far I see no difference :)
btw, thankyou all for input, very interesting :)
Jonno :cool:
Printable View
Then please to be explaining how it effects MY life? cos so far I see no difference :)
btw, thankyou all for input, very interesting :)
Jonno :cool:
Eddie izzard did a show in New York and started a piece about the NI peace talks, as the audience was quiet he asked "do you even know there are other countries"...... this thread being about why all the talk about the USAQuote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
not sure what the tour was called but worth a download.
:lol: Oh I see, sorry not as quick as usual today :lol:
Jonno :cool:
Jon, think about it another way. What George Bush does affects you in ways that you might not see. Do you think that perhaps some of the decisions made by other governments are made in regard to what a superpower such as the United States would like to see done? You may not see how it affects your life personally, but many Englishmen went to fight in a war in Iraq that they didn't start, but were sent to fight in because of a decision by George Bush. Their lives, and those of their families, have been affected.
Interest rates, fluctuations in currency values, stock market dips - these are things which affect us all globally. The US being a wealthy country, and having so much money invested in so many things globally, does have a huge impact on these things.
Of course other countries impact these things as well, but on a smaller scale, so we may not notice them as much. It's the things that draw our attention that we tend to bitch about, and as others have said, when you make yourself (as a country) stand out in the forefront, you are more likely to have slings and arrows tossed at you.
Good point :) Yes I realise that, again my original point was the seeming fear people have about saying anything good about the US.
Yes the UK got involved, those who have lost their lives died for a cause, my heart goes out to them and their bravery is outstanding.
But to be blunt and take out the emotional side to it (this may sound worse than I mean it, please keep an open mind) when you join the army you must realise there is a chance of war, a chef does not become a chef and not expect to cut himself. You see what I mean?
Please don't get me wrong on this, but it is a fact that a soldier signs up with the knowledge he may someday have to risk his life for his country.
The war imo was inevitable, it's been going on for years and like I said, it was them who invaded, the US and UK Retaliated.
Jonno :cool:
Did you read the 2nd paragraph? :unsure:
Its not all about the war :rolleyes:
Not because of someone that was told by God to invade another country..Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
That is the point Jonno.
Shame you cant see it yourself...
Jonno.
There is an equally valid argument to say that Al Qaida retaliated against The US' foreign policy in the only way they could. They did not drive planes into Central NYC on a whim.
@RF .... No, they were/are defending against people who are told by god.
A quick question if you don't mind (to anyone who reads) What do you think would have been the outcome if we had not invaded and after 9/11 they just quietly went looking for Bin Laden?
I'm curios :)
@Manker ..... Thats my point, we argue about stuff but just because we dissagree we don't go killing thousands of inocent people. It was a retaliation with brute force to someone who attacked the US , why did they attack the US? For what reason?
Jonno :cool:
Yes, Jon, I understand that. The key words being "for his country". What is the specific reason that the UK is fighting this war? Because the US is fighting this war.
EDIT:They did. And they were completely justified in doing so, although they didn't do as much as they should have in this regard. I don't think anyone will argue that the US was justified in trying to find Bin Laden and bring him to justice. It was proven that Bin Laden was instrumental in the attacks. To what purpose did they invade Iraq? It has never been proven that Hussein had anything to do with 9/11. Or that he had weapons of mass destruction. Perhaps I'm mistaken on this second point though.Quote:
A quick question if you don't mind (to anyone who reads) What do you think would have been the outcome if we had not invaded and after 9/11 they just quietly went looking for Bin Laden?
Exactly :01:Quote:
Originally Posted by NikkiD
I reckon if Iraq hadn't have been invaded it would have probably carried on like it had done since the last Gulf War.
Mr Bush has said that he too has been told to fight this fight by God too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jonno
They knew where Bin Laden was. They could have taken him out at any time, however the delayed... look at who were the only people flying out of the USA shortly after 9/11 then ask yourself why.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
In addition, the Taliban offered to hand him over... to any country other than the USA as they believed he wouldnt get a Fair Trial there.. well Cuba shows they were probably right there too.
Finally, the only Al Queda Training camps in Iraq were those in the Kurd controlled North East, where Saddam couldnt get them. They were actually fighting with the Kurds and USA to invade Iraq... so you tell me, does Bush give a stuff about Bin Laden?
Its actually been quite handy for him, being able to point to Al Queda in Iraq the last few month... even though they had absolutely no influence there before the invasion...
Every day I thank my lucky stars that this still be true.. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by DanB
I just wrote the reason. They attacked the US because of the US' foreign policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Please read what I've written, Jonno. That is the reason I've stayed out of this thread for as long as this.
Also:
Yes - If you wish to put it simply - we argued with Saddam about looking at his factories, when we reached disagreement we killed thousands and thousands of Iraqi civillians.
When I say we, I'm talking of the coalition.
I'll try a different tack then...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
A country is its people, not one person.
Blaire wanted to be Bush's lapdog, the population (ie the country) didnt want to go in.
Only 30% of the UK population supports the Iraq War.. ie: They are not fighting for their country.
I personally think the reason is because they have been a threat for a long time and it has affected our people, again, we are retaliating, the US and the UK are Buddies in goverment, Bush and Blair got together like a couple of kids and said "Lets go show these fuckers who their messing with" , gung ho.
They are fighting for England and the safety of the people of the world.
Terrorism is a disease which needs iradicating, where do you start? at the heart.
Our boys are fighting for our right to live, does'nt matter who sent them where, they are fighting for me, and you and everyone else, so we can see the olympics or football or other big events without someone saying "I hope there's not a bomber in there" or words to that effect.
So we can get on a plane without the fear of it being mercilessly rammed into a building, so we can go to big cities in our homeland without the threat of a car exploding as you walk past.
They fight for peace, in this mad fucked up world the only thing some people understand is force, they wont talk, they wont chill out, they hate and want death and destruction. If thats the only way then so be it.
When this is all over, maybe 2morrow maybe not for 50 years, our childrens children have the chance to live life without the fear of being caught in the middle.
One day there will be peace, whether or not the human race will be around to see it is another question altogether :)
And with that I think I will leave this topic and thankyou all for sharing your thoughts :)
Jonno :cool:
They may be fighting for you, they certainly are not fighting in my name..Quote:
they are fighting for me, and you
No, thank you.
What a load of cliched rubbish. Did you even listen to one person's point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
:lol: :lol: :lol:
This is why we should have stayed out of this thread :frusty:
Ok Jonno, just remember there weren't any terrorists in Iraq before the Coalition invaded
Sorry I missed this. And considering you're the only person who answered my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by NikkiD
To irradicate the threat of Hussien.
Did you trust him?
Ok bye :lol:
@Manker . That's called believing in the good, optomism, glass is half full :)
Jonno :cool:
Question asked:
Answer given:Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
What is the point. I may as well talk to that virtual bartender thing :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
:lol: And there was me thinking I had answered your question too :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Yes I did, I read all and thanked everyone for their views, did you not see that bit? :)
The above was in answer to you saying it was cliched rubbish :)
Jonno :cool:
Its nice to see some new faces in here instead of the same group of us arguing all the time.
No, thats whats called having a Broken Glass...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
@DanBuilding and testing of chemical weapons in Iraq and surrounding area?Quote:
I reckon if Iraq hadn't have been invaded it would have probably carried on like it had done since the last Gulf War.
Planes smashing into buildins?
It's been like this for years, maybe not quite to the scale it is now, but what about the other attcks on the world trade centre and various others round the world, they've been going on years, it just needed a trigger to spark it all off. 9/11 was that trigger.
Jonno :cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Has it been proved that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11? :unsure:
Yes, that's exactly what THEY did. The government is supposed to represent the wishes of its people, no? The people don't support this decision. The government, in this case Blair, is making unsupported decisions because of his "buddy" George Bush.Quote:
I personally think the reason is because they have been a threat for a long time and it has affected our people, again, we are retaliating, the US and the UK are Buddies in goverment, Bush and Blair got together like a couple of kids and said "Lets go show these fuckers who their messing with" , gung ho.
They are fighting for England and the safety of the people of the world.
Yes, exactly. Is Iraq the heart? Not that I've seen.Quote:
Terrorism is a disease which needs iradicating, where do you start? at the heart.
When has UK been attacked? The longer they buddy up with the US, the more they make themselves a target. The US is a target because of its foreign policies. The more the UK adapts these policies the more of a target it becomes. Fighting this war is not eradicating terrorism and protecting UK citizens from attacks. It is making the likelihood of an attack on UK soil increase.Quote:
Our boys are fighting for our right to live, does'nt matter who sent them where, they are fighting for me, and you and everyone else, so we can see the olympics or football or other big events without someone saying "I hope there's not a bomber in there" or words to that effect.
So we can get on a plane without the fear of it being mercilessly rammed into a building, so we can go to big cities in our homeland without the threat of a car exploding as you walk past.
Good reason or not, the fact that the UK is standing shoulder to shoulder with the US will make terrorists take more notice of it. I don't agree with it. I don't support it. However, can you not see how this can be construed by terrorist? If you are friends with the enemy, then you become the enemy.
Is it for peace? Isn't the foundation of peace that everyone deserves to have their own way of life and their own beliefs? There will never be an end to the fighting as long as everyone forces their beliefs on everyone else. Period. Retaliating doesn't foster peace. It creates a chain reaction. The US went into Iraq with the pretense of doing for those that could not do for themselves. But are they taking into account what the citizens of Iraq want now that Hussein is gone? Do you see what I mean with this? I could go on and on about this.Quote:
They fight for peace, in this mad fucked up world the only thing some people understand is force, they wont talk, they wont chill out, they hate and want death and destruction. If thats the only way then so be it.
When this is all over, maybe 2morrow maybe not for 50 years, our childrens children have the chance to live life without the fear of being caught in the middle.
As long as governments see fit to shove their noses into others personal freedoms, there will not be.Quote:
One day there will be peace, whether or not the human race will be around to see it is another question altogether :)
Our belief structure is different that that of the people in the middle east. Does that mean it is better? We seem to think so, but do we take into account what they think? We're arrogant to think that our way of life is right and theirs is wrong. I may not agree with it but I don't deny them the right to live their lives the way they see fit. Who are we to tell them they're doing it wrong? The only way there will ever be world peace is if EVERY country keeps to themselves and leaves everyone else alone. That will never happen. Someone will always be out there to tell others they're doing it wrong.
Eurgh, no I said this earlier that they went in because they could'nt get Bin Laden, so they went for Sadam, bit childish but like I said, it was gonna happen sooner or later, if left alone what would saddam have done?
How far would he have gone?
I'll ask you the same I asked Nikki, Did you trust him?
The End Justfies the means.
Jonno :cool:
Edit: : Nikki , I'm only gonna answer this bit cos I really would like to get out of this thread :)
Were there no Uk people in the twin towers? Bali? and the hundreds of other attacks?Quote:
When has UK been attacked?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
:no:
Good post Nikki :D
edit - earlier on Jonno you claimed they had invaded our country and you were scared to go out in case you got caught in a bomb. To then say oh but English people in other countries were caught up in it sort of ruins your whole paragraph
Oh right, well I didn't want that answered. I'm right, it need not be added to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Here, I'll show you - Cliched rubbish:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Not being funny, mate, but you've either just finished watching the entire Terminator Trilogy or you're The Ultimate Warrior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
10 points for naming who he just quoted :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
The End Justfies the means.
Ahmed Chalabi :unsure:
or some Machiavelli bloke :lol:
Or maybe I try to see the good in situations, maybe I don't want to look at everything thro dark windows, maybe thats my right to feel that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
You asked if I've listend to people views and points, yes I have, has anyone listend to my views and points to try and understand them as I have yours?
When it boils down to it, we all think differently and all have different opinions, no one is right or wrong, what one man thinks is right, another thinks is wrong.
Who is right?
Jonno :cool:
Bet you thinking someone different :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
Jonno :cool:
I don't trust a lot of people. Does that give me the right to decimate their homes and families? So now it's okay to attack anyone that is untrustworthy?Quote:
Eurgh, no I said this earlier that they went in because they could'nt get Bin Laden, so they went for Sadam, bit childish but like I said, it was gonna happen sooner or later, if left alone what would saddam have done?
How far would he have gone?
I'll ask you the same I asked Nikki, Did you trust him?
Unfortunately it doesn't. It just adds fuel to the fire. Do you honestly think that the invasion of Iraq is the end?Quote:
The End Justfies the means.
As to the UK citizens in the WTC and Bali etc, I don't disagree with you there. They were tragic, but they weren't the prime targets in the attacks? How many innocent Iraqis have died since the invasions? Are their lives less valuable? Does the grieving Iraqi who has just lost a loved one deserve less sympathy than the grieving American/Canadian/Englishman/insert countless countries who lost a loved one on 9/11.
If look at all of this without emotion, it's like one big schoolyard fight. You kicked me, so I'm going to kick you back, and then your friend looked at me funny so I'm gonna kick him too, then your friend jumps in to back you up and so on and so forth.
No, Jonno.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
People are frequently right or wrong every day. In this case you've contradicted, contorted and twisted your opinions to suit whoever you were arguing with.
I'm afraid that makes you wrong.
I read your posts with intent when I reply to them, I always make sure that I address each point I consider to be pertinent, in doing that me understanding your viewpoint is essential. So yes, I listened to your views.
So let me get this straight, every one of you would think it would have been better if Iraq had never been touched?
Jonno :cool:
Isn't that the point of all of it? The only difference is that some people use forceful means to try and make people see their opinions, others are content to talk about it.Quote:
When it boils down to it, we all think differently and all have different opinions, no one is right or wrong, what one man thinks is right, another thinks is wrong.
Who is right?
Were Iraq and Alkieda willing to talk?