The war on terror

[Dyson]

I was expecting this to be a hidden track on Muse's new album.

 

:bowdown:

[Dan_Dare]

This thred is rubbish. I'm derailing it with cute bear pictures

 

[Dyson]

So, Dan Dare, I see The Watchtower was a rousing success

[Dan_Dare]

hay man! Whatevar! Ashley ran off to do work and try and score some Asian tail. Don't blame me!

[Gizmo]

As I understand it, Afghanistan was never in doubt as to its legality.

 

Iraq came down to interpretations of UNSC Resolution 1441, which the Americans argued gave legal authorisation for military action, and France argued it didn't. I'm not familiar with the exact wording, as it's probably all in lawyer techno-babble. Upshot; the resolution gave mention of some sort of action that could be taken if they failed to comply, which America took to mean invasion and France took to mean further sanctions.

[Iun]

Upshot; the resolution gave mention of some sort of action that could be taken if they failed to comply, which America took to mean invasion and France took to mean further whining and further practice of shitting their pants every time they see a water pistol.

 

Sorry Giz, just had to fix that for you.

 

There's nothing "Illegal" about war, otherwise half the world would be brought up on charges. The question is not "Can we go to war?" to which the answer is almost always "yes", but instead "why are we going to war?" .

[Chris the great]

meh, think we went to iraq for bad reasons, but should stay, war on afganistan was more agreeable, but still, the number of civilians dead on afganistan or iraq individualy as a direct result of our action dwarfs the number lost in the terrorist attacks. seems kinda hypocritical to old chris.

[Haden]

The reason the Iraq War was/is illegal is because the invasion was based on old resolutions from the first Gulf War, judged to be sufficient grounds by Downing Street (see 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_687). They weren't - the infringements never occurred, there were no WMDS. The evidence to the contrary has never been published because it doesn't exist. The two inquiries into the Iraq War (Butler, Hutton) produced the reams of data (emails mainly) that clearly demonstrate how Blair, Darling, Scarlett, Goldsmith and so on polished the worst kind of sketchy information into grounds for war.

 

LOL WHAT DOUCHEBAGS

 

Went to a talk by Paddy Ashdown recently. And he actually said while he was against the Iraq war the people who pro war people had very good Legal arguments and the legality side wasn't where the argument should be centred.

 

Man is a legend wish him and Blair would have formed a partnership.

 

Anyway I was for the Iraq war legal or not, legality doesn't always decide moral foreign policy. Some of the shit that has been passed through the UN beggars belief. I believe it was made illegal to criticise the Burmese regime over human rights issues because China used a veto back during the riots.

[The fish]

Sorry Giz, just had to fix that for you.

 

I am always curious as to where this idea the French are all cowards comes from.

 

Most people point to World War II, but, to be honest, if Washington DC was as far behind the lines as Paris was, then the Americans would have been out of the war just as quickly - the only thing that could stop the Blitzkrieg was space - in both North Africa and the USSR, the German supply lines became too thin, crippling their strategy.

 

In the WWI, the French were holding the line the entire time. They were there in both Korea and the Suez. Just over 100 years prior to WWI, France controlled all of Western mainland Europe. The only reason they didn't help invade Iraq was because there was no evidence for the justifications made.

 

As for fighting Terrorists, I'm all for it - if you have to resort to violence to get your message across, then clearly your message is horrifically unappealing. The Taliban especially are welcome to a damn good kicking any day of the week.

 

Some of the shit that has been passed through the UN beggars belief. I believe it was made illegal to criticise the Burmese regime over human rights issues because China used a veto back during the riots.

 

Indeed. Another fine example is the UN's Human Rights Council, which contains a very large quantity of Middle Eastern countries (hypocrisy, much?). They are currently trying to make it a right of all people that, if you are Muslim, you cannot be criticised for your beliefs. The other big group in the Council is, thank Christ, the EU, who's done the diplomatic equivalent of telling them to stick it up their arse and grow up.

[Iun]

I am always curious as to where this idea the French are all self-absorbed, arrogant cowards comes from.

 

Fixed that for you there. But seriously: live with them for a few years like I did. Walk the streets I walked, take the buses, travel on the trains, teach the kids, meet the parents, observe the radical unionisation of everything from the highest level of bureacracy to the cleaners in the office building. Read, ingest and understand their constitution and the reason it was formed. Then you will see what I mean.

 

Historically, the Ancien Regime, 1st, 2nd and 3rd republics were, if not a force to be reckoned with, were certainly on par with most of the militaries of their day. But they had too much faith in the defences of the border iwith Germany, instead of recognising fully the traditional German/Prussian route of attack through the Low Countries.

 

From the end of the First World War the French began to disappear up their own asses: it's understandable, their country took one of the biggest poundings any country has ever taken. But what was notable on their part was a vindictive sense of wounded pride, and a strong desire to punish the whole German nationn for the war.

 

Most people point to World War II, but, to be honest, if Washington DC was as far behind the lines as Paris was, then the Americans would have been out of the war just as quickly - the only thing that could stop the Blitzkrieg was space - in both North Africa and the USSR, the German supply lines became too thin, crippling their strategy.

 

Blitzkreig could have been stopped by a flanking counter-attack. However, the French army was massively underprepared and underequipped oustside of the Magineau line. The BEF pretty much had their back to the sea from the start. Had the FRench forces been better prepared and better led, they could have regrouped, and counter attacked the infantry. Infantry is essential to maintaining a hold on occupied territory such as cities and outposts, and the French infantry was made up of over-30's in need of retraining.

 

In the WWI, the French were holding the line the entire time. They were there in both Korea and the Suez. Just over 100 years prior to WWI, France controlled all of Western mainland Europe. The only reason they didn't help invade Iraq was because there was no evidence for the justifications made.

 

Partly right. Their construction and oil contracts with the country made after the first Gulf War were significantly more revenue-generating than any other Western power. Don't kid yourself that the French held back on a matter of conscience -their motivation was purely economic self-preservation.

 

And yes, they did control much of Europe - but that was a different France. That was the French Empire, 100 years before the Great War, Britain controlled the largest empire the planet has ever known. The French as a nation are naturally divisicve, unco-operative and selfish. They have been since the Revolution. A fully united France under military dictatorship is a threat, as they turn all their whining energy towards conquest, France as is now is pretty much a controlled argument.

 

The largest issue the Allies have with France is their lack of gratitude for the help of other nations during the wars, and of course De Gaulle's blocking of the UK's entry into the EEC. The French love the Americans, but they just wish the Americans were more like... the French. As far as they are concerned, Britain and other Allies played no part in the liberation of France -it was all the Americans.

 

As for fighting Terrorists, I'm all for it - if you have to resort to violence to get your message across, then clearly your message is horrifically unappealing. The Taliban especially are welcome to a damn good kicking any day of the week.

 

Not simply for acts of terror, but also for their disgusting insistence on implementing Sharia law and the strict interpretation of the Qu'ran.

[The fish]

 

Not simply for acts of terror, but also for their disgusting insistence on implementing Sharia law and the strict interpretation of the Qu'ran.

 

It's not strict, it's simply not an interpretation that, from the version of the Qu'ran I have, cannot be drawn without serious dramatic licence or knowing what you want it to say before you start reading...

[stuwii]

The iranian regime is hardline islamist- and want to destroy israel at any cost

 

Any all my points are well thought through

[S.C.G]

Is that from the government's official press release?

 

Pretty much yeah.

 

Any all my points are well thought through

 

Wait, what?

[blender]

all israel have to do is send some earth and water to the persians and then they will be left alone. There are bigger players to deal with iran... At the end of the day, my daddy is bigger than your daddy. Irans god is a biggy.

[khilafah]

As a muslim I think it is pretty obvious what my feelings are gonna be.

 

The so called war on terror in afghanistan and Iraq is wrong and the invading troops main reason for invading was for regime change. All this "we are doing it for the afghan/iraqi people" is a load of poppycock. There is more than what you see that is really going on. The US and it's allies want to spread there liberal capitalist values across the muslim world.

 

They have caused more bloodshed and anarchy for the people. Afghanistan is a mess and they should leave. Let the people decide there own future just like Iraq. The west know full well that Islam is on the rise, the general population in the muslim world want change and it is not secular liberal democracy. The people want the return of Islamic Government with sharia law.

 

This drone attacks on pakistan are a disgrace and they kill civilans on a weekly basis. Obama is no different from Bush, he quotes a few ayah's from the quran and some people think he is the saviour.

 

As for Iran, yes they want nuclear power but why shouldnt they when they have Israel right near them. Iran like talk but do nothing, they will only attack israel if israel strike first.

Edited July 29, 2009 by khilafah

[blender]

As a muslim I think it is pretty obvious what my feelings are gonna be.

 

.

 

 

it shouldnt be your religion that depicts your view and I dont think people should/will jump to conclusions about what you actually think based on your carpet. (Although apparently that is the impact on life of following islam. But who comes up with the Islamic perspective on everything anyway.)

 

 

There are plenty of islamic people in iraq and afganistan that are happy with the big picture of the wars. Their lives are improved by not having fundamentalists (afganistan) or a dicator (iraq). Most of those that disapprove vocally have never been to these countries or experienced life in the old regime...

 

 

* as a muslim you must have a carpet ?

Edited July 29, 2009 by blender

[khilafah]

it shouldnt be your religion that depicts your view and I dont think people should/will jump to conclusions about what you actually think based on your turban*. (Although apparently that is the impact on life of following islam. But who comes up with the Islamic perspective on everything anyway.)

 

 

There are plenty of islamic people in iraq and afganistan that are happy with the big picture of the wars. Their lives are improved by not having fundamentalists (afganistan) or a dicator (iraq). Most of those that disapprove vocally have never been to these countries or experienced life in the old regime...

 

 

* as a muslim you must wear a turban ?

 

have there lives really been improved though? I would argue in some cases it is no better then what it was. Afghanistan outside of Kabul is full of warlords and it is pure anarchy. The main central government just like iraq is a puppet government that is there to serve the interests of the west rather than the people or religion.

 

Yes I agree that dictatorships are wrong and need to be removed. But this should be done by the people and not by invading troops looking to spread there government's ideology. Funny how the US/UK pick and choose which dictators they like and dislike though. The muslim world is full of dictators but I guess they are all ok as long as the stop the rise of Islam..

[Wesley]

The iranian regime is hardline islamist- and want to destroy israel at any cost

 

Any all my points are well thought through

 

I wish I could remove the thanks that was given to this post.

[Nicktendo]

The iranian regime is hardline islamist- and want to destroy israel at any cost

 

Any all my points are well thought through

 

Just to be clear my 'THANKS' was for the final statement, not the first one. And it was done ironically... purely for the unbelievable amount of lols it provided.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Nicktendo

[navarre]

The iranian regime is hardline islamist- and want to destroy israel at any cost

 

They may be a bunch of mental cases, but the Iranian Government are by no means anti-semitic. The nation's 30,000 Jews suffer very little persecution.

 

As a muslim I think it is pretty obvious what my feelings are gonna be.

 

I don't think being a Muslim is an excuse for having silly views!

 

There is more than what you see that is really going on. The US and it's allies want to spread there liberal capitalist values across the muslim world.

 

I hardly think Afghanistan and Iraq qualify as the 'Muslim world'. The Iraq war may be controversial, but any war that fights the Taliban, even for the wrong reason, gets my approval. Fighting the Taliban is a human duty, not a religious or political one.

 

They have caused more bloodshed and anarchy for the people. Afghanistan is a mess and they should leave. Let the people decide there own future just like Iraq

 

Europe was a mess in the Second World War. If we are to fight evil, we have to be prepared to leave countries in a mess. Oh, and the Afghan elections will let the people decide, so that's one issue fixed.

 

The west know full well that Islam is on the rise, the general population in the muslim world want change and it is not secular liberal democracy

 

Really? Where are you getting these statistics from, is it just generalisation? It's all to well to make statements like 'atheism's increasing' or 'most atheists like capitalism', but without facts, they're nothing.

 

The people want the return of Islamic Government with sharia law.

 

Then they should have thought about that before they decided to keep Osama bin Laden in hiding.

 

This drone attacks on pakistan are a disgrace and they kill civilans on a weekly basis. Obama is no different from Bush, he quotes a few ayah's from the quran and some people think he is the saviour

 

That's because the Taliban's tactics are the most cowardly encountered yet byy NATO forces. They use civilians as shields, knowing full well the consequences.

 

As for Iran, yes they want nuclear power but why shouldnt they when they have Israel right near them. Iran like talk but do nothing, they will only attack israel if israel strike first

 

Lots of countries have Israel right near them, you don't see them striving for nuclear weapons. Maybe if Iran wasn't so damn hostile towards the Israelis all the time, they wouldn't fear a nuclear attack so much.

 

The muslim world is full of dictators but I guess they are all ok as long as the stop the rise of Islam..

 

Typical paranoia. In case you hadn't noticed, freedom of religion is granted in Western countries. Contrary to popular belief, exterminating Islam isn't on the top of leader's agendas.

 

It seems to me that your views are nothing more than inconcievable rubbish, advocating the evil of the Taliban, endorsing the nuclear armament of Iran and attacking the West.

[stuwii]

Iran said it wanted to wipe israel off the map- FACT

[Gizmo]

Source for this, Stuwii?

[navarre]

Iran said it wanted to wipe israel off the map- FACT

 

That's one interpretation. But the President doesn't have the power to anyway.

[danny]

have there lives really been improved though? I would argue in some cases it is no better then what it was. Afghanistan outside of Kabul is full of warlords and it is pure anarchy. The main central government just like iraq is a puppet government that is there to serve the interests of the west rather than the people or religion.

 

Yes I agree that dictatorships are wrong and need to be removed. But this should be done by the people and not by invading troops looking to spread there government's ideology. Funny how the US/UK pick and choose which dictators they like and dislike though. The muslim world is full of dictators but I guess they are all ok as long as the stop the rise of Islam..

 

Yes there lives have been improved. I have seen this with my very own eyes. Afghanistan pree 2001 was full of warlords, so i do not see yor point. It is not pure anarchy outside Kabul. Certain areas are but not the entire country mostly just the south.

Isnt the thing with a dictatorship that the people cant do something about it? Hence why it has to be done by someone else? how can you vote someone out when as in Iraq there only one name on the ballot paper. or 2 as in other countrys they just rig the elections.

Its got nothing to do with the fact these countrys are muslim. Its the politics that go with them. The taliban braught along there own demise by refusing to do anything about al quida launching an attack on the US.

As for the drone attacks, if Pakistan would put there own house in order there would be no need for them. And this is what they have been doing in Swat.

 

If you are basing your views on the fact you are a muslim then you are daft. Suerly you can see what this minority of the muslim world is doing is wrong. I have served with muslims in afghanistan and they hated the taliban more than any 'white chrisitans' i served with.

[blender]

Iran said it wanted to wipe israel off the map- FACT

 

Fact confirmed

 

have there lives really been improved though? I would argue in some cases it is no better then what it was. Afghanistan outside of Kabul is full of warlords and it is pure anarchy. The main central government just like iraq is a puppet government that is there to serve the interests of the west rather than the people or religion.

 

Yes I agree that dictatorships are wrong and need to be removed. But this should be done by the people and not by invading troops looking to spread there government's ideology. Funny how the US/UK pick and choose which dictators they like and dislike though. The muslim world is full of dictators but I guess they are all ok as long as the stop the rise of Islam..

 

dont disagree or agree or really know enough.. i was only picking at your opening line. Just because you are muslim shouldnt automatically mean you are antiwar (or that people would automatically jump to that conclusion).

 

The idea that there is a united islam "brotherhood" or single viewpoint always irritates me. Its something fundamentalist like to peddle whiles blowing each other up.

 

In fact, i would probably post it to the "what really annoys you thread" if i had not already posted something more important.

Edited July 29, 2009 by blender
Automerged Doublepost