Guest George Posted February 9, 2003 Report Share Posted February 9, 2003 So now we know why we are going to war, a Californian student had it all figured out in 1991 and it's just come to light. Goddamit, what are we waiting for let's go zap the son of a b... the kid may be right!!I have my own theory, Phony Tony, (the Magpie supporter who doesn't know his Gallowgate End from his Leazes), wants Saddam's job. Just think about it, there's all those lovely Palaces for free, oodles of oil he can sell to us to keep Gordon happy and more to the point all those sandcastles he and the kids can build without having to sponge from those nice Egyptians.Claire Short is quoted in the Mail on Sunday as saying, "People don't believe us", how's that one for originality and the blinding obvious. Blair say's he's putting his political carrer on the line over tha nasty Saddam bsiness, what the hell is the poor squaddie putting on the line?I just pray he keeps on thinking the only Stadium of Light is in Portugal, if he finds otherwise that would really finish us off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted February 9, 2003 Report Share Posted February 9, 2003 who knows why where going to war,stadium of sh*te,is'nt that a first division football ground :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark2 Posted February 9, 2003 Report Share Posted February 9, 2003 Did I read somewhere that of 19 pages in the report 11 had been published elsewhere ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 found out why where going to war http://www.angelfire.com/dc/mbooks/waroniraq.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 bush only see's what he wants to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 another Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spook Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 Gazing into the crystal ball... ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted March 2, 2003 Report Share Posted March 2, 2003 I have proof here that saddams up to no good :D http://www.iol.ie/~forsacosanta/world_needed_proof.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mundy Posted March 2, 2003 Report Share Posted March 2, 2003 Some wicked links there chaps.spook - brilliant, funny/tragic scenario. I'll not sleep tonight. :ph34r: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 3, 2003 Report Share Posted March 3, 2003 The world according to you know who! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 3, 2003 Report Share Posted March 3, 2003 another.....whoops....try again :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 3, 2003 Report Share Posted March 3, 2003 here it is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted March 3, 2003 Report Share Posted March 3, 2003 I just wish it was funny......................Out of interest ....does anybody think that Blair will get re elected ...?.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted March 3, 2003 Report Share Posted March 3, 2003 I think that map is used for teaching purposes in the US mid west...... nel ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spook Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 Mundy, sentiments shared matey - and Nellie, love the map!Sorry if this offends - please remove it if it does: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 I'm not offended anyone else :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 Nope.............. :D :D :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 poster's are too big ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 7, 2003 Report Share Posted March 7, 2003 At the risk of being terribly untrendy.......I get the impression that a lot of people are 'protesting' about the possibility of war not because they have strong convictions but because it seems the 'fashionable' thing to do. If these same protesters were given the choice of living in a dictatorship or under a government that they had a say in........by having a vote, whether or not they choose to use that vote.....it would be interesting to see which way they would go.I was off work on 11th September 2001 and I watched it all as it happened on TV. I watched those poor people jump out of the buildings and fall to their deaths, I watched the second plane crash into the other tower, I watched as the buildings collapsed.......it was all so surreal and horrifying. I know that Saddam and Al Quieda are different.......dare I use the word.....threats! But they do have one thing in common and that is fanaticism. They don't care about the consequences of their actions. When Saddam fired the oil fields in Kuwait he was not bothered about the effect that action might have on his peoples crops etc.I may be a tad naive.......but I really don't think that our governments would take this course of action unless they perceived there to be a real threat. However.......I do think they should give it a bit more time......but ultimately.....if we have to go in then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted March 7, 2003 Report Share Posted March 7, 2003 What about Isrealies...Nel ?...They have broken more UN sanctions than Saddam.......! Tanks and gunships against peoples houses..................!The IRA have cumulatively killed more people, than who died in 9/11, yet we are letting them out of jail .....without even a bullet being destroyed......................Where,s the Rt Rev tone,s moral convictions there ? North Korea is brazenly building nukes with 2 fingers in the air..........................Most of the funding ...and the people involved in 9/11 were Saudi Arabian in origin, not Iraqi.......yet they are our mates (nothing to do with the fact that they are the UKs arms biggest buyer)If we have a problem with Saddam and a small number of his cronies....why are we going to bomb the *beep* out of the people ?Do you think that when the bombing will be finally over ,the terrorist threat will decrease...? or increase !They are not the only people the US and the UK have sold their weapons of mass destruction too ! Bush should ask to see Rumsfelds receipt book ..to see who,s next......!Incidently ...why arnt the people who pimped this technology in the first place, in jail for their crimes against humaninty..........? (bit too close to home perhaps )Is the french position a moral one.......or commercial......elf are already signed up for the Iraqi oil.....If Saddam goes ,the Russian's stand to lose £6billion,s worth in oil as payment for the weapons they sold Saddam to keep the Iran Iraq 10 year war going ...the debts well old and overdue and Russia's economy is well flaky ..They need it bad ........Saddam is dangerous......(hes not stupid to keep this going for so long which is even more worrying) but is war the solution...................?.....go after the man............... not the country.................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 Looked at Spooks link..........................Hmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 I don't disagree with you Tankus.....the Israelis, the various factions in Ireland, North Korea, Zimbabwe......the lot of it.......this is a mad bad sad world and sometimes I really do despair.But coming back to Iraq. Resolution 1441 states that Saddam should disarm, fully, co-operatively and immediately. Which he hasn't done!! Why pass a resolution if no-one is going to adhere to it??I am not saying that I think war is the solution, but if there hadn't been the threat of war so far do you think that Saddam would be destroying those missiles at the moment....... I think not. The fact that the threat is not an empty threat is getting some results.War is a terrible thing.....it is the innocent and those least able to protect themselves that suffer.But.....coming back to my original point, I will not protest against something just because it seems to be the in thing to do. But thank goodness we have free speech and those who wish to protest can........I am sure if they protested against Saddam in Iraq they would disapear........never to be seen again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spook Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 Mad bad world - has it ever been any different?It strikes me as very odd that there has been such a focus on war alone. That the issue should be either that of a pro war stance or anti war, those diametrically opposed. Is there no common ground or any other way to resolve this issue? Who set the agenda? That this is the necessary state of play, and the only topic (pertaining to Iraq) that exists for discussion I find to be very odd. What other terms of negotiation for (let's face it) securing Iraq's oil reserves for Western consumption whilst being seen to have effectively dealt with and punished *Saddam* and the *Iraqi* regime are there? It is pretty clear to me that the US Administration is using the issue of what happened on Sept 11th last year - its anti-terrorist imperialist stance - to effectively push this economic agenda of theirs? All reports point to worsening global recession; oil prices are critical in both forecasting the likely impact and duration of US economic recession and the 'stability of' for providing the climb out of that recession when manufacturing and tertiary industries begin feeding Americans over-indulgent needs. They are at least not ignorant of this but blind to perusing any other courses of action to lessen the economic damage a serious recession will have.What are the choices and what is the wider scenario? Oil resources largely depend on not the quantitative conditions of supply, geology and such like (as new resources are found on a daily basis) but economic and social causes, just like famine is not an environmental (or quantitative determinant) but a socially given variable, much more related to social and conditions of national security, international accessibility and both intra (within) and inter-accountability (to its people and those other nations, shared border or no); Iraq and numerous other inaccessible or 'unstable' regimes/nations is just one such example.Anyway, as an asides - the whole early 90s agenda of exploring alternatives to the diminishing fossil fuel reserves has been almost totally removed from the media spotlight in recent years. (Oil reserves by numerous surveys were then expected to last a further 50 years of present rate consumption bearing in mind that was increasing and other fossil fuel reserves, gas and coal were said to be quantitatively exploitable for further 200 years or so). The whole issue of Global Warming et al, was supposed to necessitate (more than economic, social or political reasons) the exploration of other sources of more sustainable and possibly renewable energy resources. (Nuclear power, by the way, ran out of grants thanks to bankruptcy of the old Union of Socialist Soviet Republican states and cessation of the 'Cold War' - not from a change of political attitude in the western US/UK led for ignoring social or economical protests against its further development.) Thankfully, we Brits have the North Sea (err) and its gas reserves are helping us out enormously in meeting European protocols for reducing CO2 emissions. The US though, along with virtually every other environmental treaty, biodiversity, debt relief (social issues were seen as an integral part of environmental issues especially (for some strange reason) just stuck its fingers up in the air in a triumphant gesture of "'forget' you", and said to hell with it. The aim of Rio and future summits was to treat the shared environmental objective of pollution, resource degradation and climate change in its social and cultural context, taking into consideration the special needs of the then called Lesser Developed Countries (majority world) for acheiving a higher rate of economic growth allowing them to 'catch up' with western levels of development whilst minimising the environmental impact that would have. History unfolds and we've seen the whole master plan and reasons behind (the then) more baffling reasons for the US's effective withdrawal of protecting global and particularly, South American, rain forest reserves. GM became a household word and it's no surprise that both the dollar and the belief that making a buck is every 'American's' right was what lay behind that particular dropped 'Rio - Earth Summit' treaty. Third world issues have slipped somewhat from the global political agenda, albeit keen focus is given to issues of global security - socialist uprising anyone?The environmental agenda never really went away - it underlies the entire basis of 'economics' (much clouded as it is by social and technological aspects) - and why Bush and his obliging brit buddy Blair will go to war is the same as ever. $kerr-ching$. It's nice to find another more socially polite term for necessity of war, but the bottom line is those who have want more and can easily keep those who have not from taking a larger slice of the cake since they have the muscle, whilst those kept weak are too infirm to raise an objection. South Africans invented 'apartheid' to keep the hordes of dark skinned beings away from the riches of their native lands, and thought it was only right of course. Enter such terrorists as Mandela, Gandhi et al... Acceptable norms and popular morality grow from the complex milieu of struggle against injustice. I for one, do not see either stance of the US or UK for war as a just cause, and regretfully stand as conscientious abstainer in all this. I'll carry on watching the telly, reading the news, thinking about it all and being subject to whatever decisions are taken on my behalf in this, the democratic west, regardless of their outcome, negative or positive for me, my health, my 'rights', my conscience, or my wallet. It's not like those 4 or more billion people of the world's significant poor would really miss out on western privileges like health service, free education, democracy (does not come free), fair employment and economic opportunities - given time, we in the free and enlightened west won't need to worry about those luxuries anymore either.Sorry for the essay but thought I’d deliver it all in one go, rather than in bits and pieces. Maybe not a cohesive or particularly valid explanation – I accept that – but thought I’d give a little to the discussion. My defence is that nothing can be considered in isolation since everything is an interconnected whole. Too bad if that makes life complicated and indeterminable, you do your best and that will have to do. Somebody ought to tell Bush that though I suspect he’d need to be lobotomised to comply with something simple like consideration of a fellow human being. Blair has already been lobotomised by the strange look of his eyes… If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em as they say! :blink: Sorry for grammatical and nonsensical errors - knackered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 Whew!!!!Well said Spook!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spook Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 Thanks Nellie. Deleted more than I wrote - and just deleted this post too. Maybe it's deletion that makes society work better? Holding back from too unrestrained and un-thought out action? I certainly think that most of my mistakes are rash ones and believe also that as supposedly enlightened beings, we are duty bound to use the power of our 'rational' brains, no matter what the difficulty of circumstances for doing so. I personally think ancient religious traditions, that are the preserve of whatever culture a person comes from, be they Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist etc, are very relevent today. Not idealistically so either. No human being enjoys suffering - all fear death. It can be a struggle to remember that, more so for the west I think. Especially the younger generations...Preaching over. (For now.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.