The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
All today, there has been talk & the report publish by the UN weapons inspectors, about how Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Distruction & how they were not in any position to start to build a arsenal to destroy the west.
There has been all these protests about people who oppose the war. I have a name for those people. "NEVILLE CHAMBERLIN'S". If Chamberlin in 1937 turned round to Hitler & said, "No more of the appeasement crap, you do anything Britain & France will invade straight away." You know if he done that;
- 25 Million Soviets would not have died
- approx. 15-22 million Chinese Deaths
- 6 million Polish Citizens
- 6 million Germans, Whermacht & Civilians
- 1.2 Million Japanese, further 1.4 Million missing or non-recovered bodies, further 1 million at Hirosma & Nakasaki
- 1.7 Yugoslavs
- 500,000 Greeks
- 200,000 French Soldiers & 400,000 French Civilians
- 330,000 Italian
- 147,000 Hungarian
- 73,000 Romanian
- 19,000 Bulgarian
- 264,000 British Soldiers & Further 60,000 Civilians
- 292,000 US Soldiers
- 10,000 Dutch Soldiers & 190,000 Civilians
- 23,000 Australians
- 37,000 Candians
- 24,000 Indians
- 10,000 New Zealand
- 6,000 South African
- 6 Million Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Communists, etc. and 17 Million in Japan's policies in Asia 1939-45
If Churchill came into power alot ealier, I recon that alot of those millions upon millions of lives would have been saved.... Blair is a modern day Winston, who decided to take out a Tryant before Saddam became a problem.
People say to me "think about civilians that died", but I say, how many civilians are now safe and will not die under Saddams regieme. Millions of people in the Iraq and Afganistan are now not going to die in similar ways as the Jews did......
Also it sends out with another message like "DONT F**K WITH US!"
There has been all these protests about people who oppose the war. I have a name for those people. "NEVILLE CHAMBERLIN'S". If Chamberlin in 1937 turned round to Hitler & said, "No more of the appeasement crap, you do anything Britain & France will invade straight away." You know if he done that;
- 25 Million Soviets would not have died
- approx. 15-22 million Chinese Deaths
- 6 million Polish Citizens
- 6 million Germans, Whermacht & Civilians
- 1.2 Million Japanese, further 1.4 Million missing or non-recovered bodies, further 1 million at Hirosma & Nakasaki
- 1.7 Yugoslavs
- 500,000 Greeks
- 200,000 French Soldiers & 400,000 French Civilians
- 330,000 Italian
- 147,000 Hungarian
- 73,000 Romanian
- 19,000 Bulgarian
- 264,000 British Soldiers & Further 60,000 Civilians
- 292,000 US Soldiers
- 10,000 Dutch Soldiers & 190,000 Civilians
- 23,000 Australians
- 37,000 Candians
- 24,000 Indians
- 10,000 New Zealand
- 6,000 South African
- 6 Million Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Communists, etc. and 17 Million in Japan's policies in Asia 1939-45
If Churchill came into power alot ealier, I recon that alot of those millions upon millions of lives would have been saved.... Blair is a modern day Winston, who decided to take out a Tryant before Saddam became a problem.
People say to me "think about civilians that died", but I say, how many civilians are now safe and will not die under Saddams regieme. Millions of people in the Iraq and Afganistan are now not going to die in similar ways as the Jews did......
Also it sends out with another message like "DONT F**K WITH US!"
Page:
The Confederate wrote:
> As for the terrorist increase, it is due to the fact that, the
> average person in the middle east, i.e. Iraq, Iran, etc. are not as
> well educated as us, & dont watch BBC News 24 or CNN, so they
> believe propaganda that is feed by evil dictators.
I find it incredible that you can say this with a total lack of irony...Al Jazeera is one of the most independant news organisations that there is, yet both the US and UK governments have tried to limit it's airtime. Meanwhile, Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch continue to set the agenda for the airwaves...
I'm absolutely astonished at just how cretinously blinkered and stupid your beliefs are. I note you've moved away from the Churchillian comparisons now that they've been thoroughly debunked. And instead, you're working on some sort of bizarre philosophical tangent and tried to make it seem as if a war that increased the threat of terrorism counts as a good thing. Seriously, I don't think I've ever read such an inherently bigoted piece of anal leakage as this post. "Not as well educated as us"? Yeah, I suppose that they're all just a bunch of limb amputators as well eh?
> As for the terrorist increase, it is due to the fact that, the
> average person in the middle east, i.e. Iraq, Iran, etc. are not as
> well educated as us, & dont watch BBC News 24 or CNN, so they
> believe propaganda that is feed by evil dictators.
I find it incredible that you can say this with a total lack of irony...Al Jazeera is one of the most independant news organisations that there is, yet both the US and UK governments have tried to limit it's airtime. Meanwhile, Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch continue to set the agenda for the airwaves...
I'm absolutely astonished at just how cretinously blinkered and stupid your beliefs are. I note you've moved away from the Churchillian comparisons now that they've been thoroughly debunked. And instead, you're working on some sort of bizarre philosophical tangent and tried to make it seem as if a war that increased the threat of terrorism counts as a good thing. Seriously, I don't think I've ever read such an inherently bigoted piece of anal leakage as this post. "Not as well educated as us"? Yeah, I suppose that they're all just a bunch of limb amputators as well eh?
Like Edmund Burke said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing". Saddam Hussain was not a nice person, neither was Osama BinLaden, or Milochevic, or General Augusto Pinochet, or about another Billion people...
I learned of Edmund Burke, when I studied philosophy, and I do believe that people like (Listed Above) that are pillars of evil, and all that fuels their regieme is people protecting them, saying "NO WAR" or doing nothing. If only people stood up and say "NO! Saddam is a bad man and needs to be delt with" evil will be destroyed, and peace would seem ever a little bit closer.
As for the terrorist increase, it is due to the fact that, the average person in the middle east, i.e. Iraq, Iran, etc. are not as well educated as us, & dont watch BBC News 24 or CNN, so they believe propaganda that is feed by evil dictators.
I don't like George W. Bush Jr, but I do agree with him on the basis of reading Edmund Burke, when Bush said "Your either with us, or with the enemy", and I sure don't want to aid a terrorist regieme that can threaten my existance with their bloody sucide bombers.
I learned of Edmund Burke, when I studied philosophy, and I do believe that people like (Listed Above) that are pillars of evil, and all that fuels their regieme is people protecting them, saying "NO WAR" or doing nothing. If only people stood up and say "NO! Saddam is a bad man and needs to be delt with" evil will be destroyed, and peace would seem ever a little bit closer.
As for the terrorist increase, it is due to the fact that, the average person in the middle east, i.e. Iraq, Iran, etc. are not as well educated as us, & dont watch BBC News 24 or CNN, so they believe propaganda that is feed by evil dictators.
I don't like George W. Bush Jr, but I do agree with him on the basis of reading Edmund Burke, when Bush said "Your either with us, or with the enemy", and I sure don't want to aid a terrorist regieme that can threaten my existance with their bloody sucide bombers.
Chamberlain appeased Hitler, because he didn't have enough forces of his own.
If he tried to stop Hitler at that time, he could well have faltered due to the unpreparedness of the British Forces.
All the time whilst Chamberlain allowed Hitler to do his thing, The British were doing the same.
Basically what Strafio was saying, except my post is somewhat more messy.
It's just something that can be argued and argued over.
I mean, come on. We fought them back. At least be grateful THAT happened.
If he tried to stop Hitler at that time, he could well have faltered due to the unpreparedness of the British Forces.
All the time whilst Chamberlain allowed Hitler to do his thing, The British were doing the same.
Basically what Strafio was saying, except my post is somewhat more messy.
It's just something that can be argued and argued over.
I mean, come on. We fought them back. At least be grateful THAT happened.
- 200,000 French Soldiers & 400,000 French Civilians
- 330,000 Italian
- 292,000 US Soldiers
- 24,000 Indians
- 6,000 South African
- 6 Million Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Communists, etc. and 17 Million in Japan's policies in Asia 1939-45
** EXTREEME SARCASM **
take with pinch of salt...
Way to go! If it were me, I'd try and double that figure!;)
I'd say he did the world a favour...
"make some space, Genocide a race";)
- 330,000 Italian
- 292,000 US Soldiers
- 24,000 Indians
- 6,000 South African
- 6 Million Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Communists, etc. and 17 Million in Japan's policies in Asia 1939-45
** EXTREEME SARCASM **
take with pinch of salt...
Way to go! If it were me, I'd try and double that figure!;)
I'd say he did the world a favour...
"make some space, Genocide a race";)
The Confederate wrote:
>
> People say to me "think about civilians that died", but I
> say, how many civilians are now safe and will not die under Saddams
> regieme. Millions of people in the Iraq and Afganistan are now not
> going to die in similar ways as the Jews did......
>
> Also it sends out with another message like "DONT F**K WITH
> US!"
What a load of twaddle. How many civilians are safe now? Not that bloody many. Bombings on a weekly basis killing hundreds, constant fighting between militia and Coalition troops, an increase in terrorist activities around the country, spurred on by the war that was supposed to quell it.
“Don’t f##k with us”!! you are kidding aren’t you, if anything the war in Iraq, as well as causing more civilian and military casualties after we won than before, has done nothing but cause more harm than good.
>
> People say to me "think about civilians that died", but I
> say, how many civilians are now safe and will not die under Saddams
> regieme. Millions of people in the Iraq and Afganistan are now not
> going to die in similar ways as the Jews did......
>
> Also it sends out with another message like "DONT F**K WITH
> US!"
What a load of twaddle. How many civilians are safe now? Not that bloody many. Bombings on a weekly basis killing hundreds, constant fighting between militia and Coalition troops, an increase in terrorist activities around the country, spurred on by the war that was supposed to quell it.
“Don’t f##k with us”!! you are kidding aren’t you, if anything the war in Iraq, as well as causing more civilian and military casualties after we won than before, has done nothing but cause more harm than good.
SHEEPY wrote:
> Some could argue that Churchill was just a war mongerer...
> like Blair.
Yes they could argue it, they'd be idiots if they did, but they could.
> Some could argue that Churchill was just a war mongerer...
> like Blair.
Yes they could argue it, they'd be idiots if they did, but they could.
They managed to invade Kwait in the 90's and many people were watching them!
What happened to the Churchill's of the Nation?
...they surrendered!! =P
*runs away*
...they surrendered!! =P
*runs away*
Light wrote:
> I think the main difference was that Churchill actually had a genuine
> threat to deal with, whereas Iraq was never and could never have been
> a threat to us in any way, shape or form.
I agree. Iraq was (still is?) one of the most closely monitored countries in the world. There were UN inspectors en force throughout the country, satellites locked onto the region etc.
They would never be able to amass any signifcant threat to their neighbours, let alone the western world.
> I think the main difference was that Churchill actually had a genuine
> threat to deal with, whereas Iraq was never and could never have been
> a threat to us in any way, shape or form.
I agree. Iraq was (still is?) one of the most closely monitored countries in the world. There were UN inspectors en force throughout the country, satellites locked onto the region etc.
They would never be able to amass any signifcant threat to their neighbours, let alone the western world.
I think the main difference was that Churchill actually had a genuine threat to deal with, whereas Iraq was never and could never have been a threat to us in any way, shape or form.
Typical warboy drone-speak; all the reasons for war have now been exposed as lies, and all you can do is make a weak comparison to a situation bearing no resemblance to this one. When you've actually looked at any evidence whatsoever, maybe your opinion will be taken seriously. Until then, it just looks like every one of your posts should end "Yee-haw!! We sho' showed them there liberals, huh boss?"
Typical warboy drone-speak; all the reasons for war have now been exposed as lies, and all you can do is make a weak comparison to a situation bearing no resemblance to this one. When you've actually looked at any evidence whatsoever, maybe your opinion will be taken seriously. Until then, it just looks like every one of your posts should end "Yee-haw!! We sho' showed them there liberals, huh boss?"
Page: