The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Should we stay or should we go?
I'd like to hear your opinions.
I'd like to hear your opinions.
Page:
Depends alfonse. Taking my better judgement out of the frame for a moment and assuming that I believe the oil rumour is true.
You make a very good point, the cost of the war so far is incredible. But..... you could argue the benefits of gaining the oil fields or even the favour of the oil barons is worth more. Especially after the war "ends". I dread to think of the value of oil in the global market.
If anyone saw Ross Kemp on Pirates, you will realise (at least from some media perspective) what lengths people and governments are willing to go to to obtain it.
Whereas it is not too far fetched however, I just can't believe people actually think it's the truth.... :S
You make a very good point, the cost of the war so far is incredible. But..... you could argue the benefits of gaining the oil fields or even the favour of the oil barons is worth more. Especially after the war "ends". I dread to think of the value of oil in the global market.
If anyone saw Ross Kemp on Pirates, you will realise (at least from some media perspective) what lengths people and governments are willing to go to to obtain it.
Whereas it is not too far fetched however, I just can't believe people actually think it's the truth.... :S
Referring back to the oil comments, do you chaps feel the plausibility of the 'war for oil' claims are somewhat undermined by the billion-dollar bombing campaigns with money which could have been spent on alternative energy research?
I do support them ;) If only the government funding did. Ooooooh.....
I don't think we should have gone to Afghanistan or Iraq, I think we could have done things another way without losing so many lives.
Intelligent discussion is no fun when we all agree. So I'm going to play devil's advocate again....
If you don't support our troops then you can geeeet out!!
/southern accent
Intelligent discussion is no fun when we all agree. So I'm going to play devil's advocate again....
If you don't support our troops then you can geeeet out!!
/southern accent
We are there to control the peace. And I couldn't agree more to be honest. As my mate said, imagining the place without us there......
I can't honestly believe there are not alterior motives, such as the oil and favouritism when it comes to the country selling it to us. But the actual point of the war being money and oil? Hmmmm.....
I can't honestly believe there are not alterior motives, such as the oil and favouritism when it comes to the country selling it to us. But the actual point of the war being money and oil? Hmmmm.....
I'm generally against war, in favour for peaceful resolutions. However, peaceful resolutions are very rarely obtainable (terrorists generally don't have much reason for doing what they do apart from to inflict fear into the world, they want wars). So war can be the only option.
I think this war has just dragged on too long and I do wonder what our "side"'s real intentions are. I actually think the recent boom in casualties are the result of us still there long after the initial fight was about (correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it all started over Saddam Hussein?).
The fact of the matter is that we are there and despite us not not wanting the situation, it is there. It needs to be closed properly and in a way that doesn't leave us all laughing stocks of the world (well, more so than we are already)
I think this war has just dragged on too long and I do wonder what our "side"'s real intentions are. I actually think the recent boom in casualties are the result of us still there long after the initial fight was about (correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it all started over Saddam Hussein?).
The fact of the matter is that we are there and despite us not not wanting the situation, it is there. It needs to be closed properly and in a way that doesn't leave us all laughing stocks of the world (well, more so than we are already)
pete_21 wrote:
> In hindsight,does anyone think Blair and Bush's 'Team America'
> style approach was the correct way to go then ?.
>
> As already mentioned without the full facts it is difficult to
> comment but after the seemingly non existent WMD in Iraq fiasco
> forgive me for being just a touch sceptical.
I think the world needs reminding that the people leading our country are politicians, not military strategists. Going back to the entire WMD fiasco, you can hardly blame Blair or George Bush for believing in the existance of such weapons. They were throughly convinced by intelligence agencies as to the existance of such weapons, and many leaders were convinced to believe the same i.e. Germany
It just begs the question, what would you do in a hostile situation where you were being pressured by groups with military expertise?
Can we even have faith in our intelligence agencies anymore?
The SIS and their far fetched dossier regarding Iraq.
The CIA have links to the drug trade, Afghanistan supplies the majority of American heroin.
It's just difficult to jusitfy or condemn such decisions when we have access to so little information.
> In hindsight,does anyone think Blair and Bush's 'Team America'
> style approach was the correct way to go then ?.
>
> As already mentioned without the full facts it is difficult to
> comment but after the seemingly non existent WMD in Iraq fiasco
> forgive me for being just a touch sceptical.
I think the world needs reminding that the people leading our country are politicians, not military strategists. Going back to the entire WMD fiasco, you can hardly blame Blair or George Bush for believing in the existance of such weapons. They were throughly convinced by intelligence agencies as to the existance of such weapons, and many leaders were convinced to believe the same i.e. Germany
It just begs the question, what would you do in a hostile situation where you were being pressured by groups with military expertise?
Can we even have faith in our intelligence agencies anymore?
The SIS and their far fetched dossier regarding Iraq.
The CIA have links to the drug trade, Afghanistan supplies the majority of American heroin.
It's just difficult to jusitfy or condemn such decisions when we have access to so little information.
Bah I'm happy just listening to myself in fairness, you are a bonus :D
I don't think anyone can say it wasn't a mistake, but how much of that is the media spinning their spiel? At the end of the day Suddam needing punishing. It couldn't continue. As do terrorists. The war keeps them from building and multiplying, and attacking more often than they do.
You could argue that because of poltical and media spiel it actually increases the likelihood of members joining terrorists but I don't really believe that
The huge fact that most people do not want to comment on however.....
The moaning and arguing about the war is by people not fighting in the war. Those people who understand, and those who fight in it do not moan. (about the issue itself, not the equipment moaning recently).
My mate went over there (Afghan) and found the aid they were providing the inhabitants was gratifying. They all seem to feel that they should be there, no one really likes it, but in his words....and those of other soldiers....
"Knowing what it is like here, the thought of us not fighting here is far worse"
[EDIT] Oh and Blair was in there for 10 years. Not a day went by without him being verbally assasinated by more or less every single person alive. His support was getting less and less powerful as being associated with him discredited them. Should he have stayed in power for 20 years? Would he have been allowed?
I have noticed people making jokes about him stepping down just in time to hand G Brown all the rubbish. But if I remember, he wasn't really given much choice......
I don't think anyone can say it wasn't a mistake, but how much of that is the media spinning their spiel? At the end of the day Suddam needing punishing. It couldn't continue. As do terrorists. The war keeps them from building and multiplying, and attacking more often than they do.
You could argue that because of poltical and media spiel it actually increases the likelihood of members joining terrorists but I don't really believe that
The huge fact that most people do not want to comment on however.....
The moaning and arguing about the war is by people not fighting in the war. Those people who understand, and those who fight in it do not moan. (about the issue itself, not the equipment moaning recently).
My mate went over there (Afghan) and found the aid they were providing the inhabitants was gratifying. They all seem to feel that they should be there, no one really likes it, but in his words....and those of other soldiers....
"Knowing what it is like here, the thought of us not fighting here is far worse"
[EDIT] Oh and Blair was in there for 10 years. Not a day went by without him being verbally assasinated by more or less every single person alive. His support was getting less and less powerful as being associated with him discredited them. Should he have stayed in power for 20 years? Would he have been allowed?
I have noticed people making jokes about him stepping down just in time to hand G Brown all the rubbish. But if I remember, he wasn't really given much choice......
In hindsight,does anyone think Blair and Bush's 'Team America' style approach was the correct way to go then ?.
As already mentioned without the full facts it is difficult to comment but after the seemingly non existent WMD in Iraq fiasco forgive me for being just a touch sceptical.
My point over Blair was after starting the job he should have stayed to see it through,he didn't he bailed and that's why I said I think he has a lot to answer for.
Interesting,discussion thought a few more people would have contributed to it though.
As already mentioned without the full facts it is difficult to comment but after the seemingly non existent WMD in Iraq fiasco forgive me for being just a touch sceptical.
My point over Blair was after starting the job he should have stayed to see it through,he didn't he bailed and that's why I said I think he has a lot to answer for.
Interesting,discussion thought a few more people would have contributed to it though.
You and Garin in the same post? Blimey this is gonig to get out of hand :D Haha.
Anyway, going back to a few points I mentioned (and thanks for the comments :P) although you may not have voted for Tony or Labour, we all live in the same democratic society. It's everone's responsibilty. That's what people should comapign about not TB bein an idiot (genuinely what some people think is more important).
And to Alfonse's point about flaws in our society. There can be nothing but if you ask me. Every society and culture that has ever existed has issues, it just can't be perfect. The only way the war could have avoided all this is if it was voted on. By each and every individual.
This would have opened it's own problems. Take me and say pete_21 for example (sorry pete). If it was just down to us (for arguments sake) to decide, could we? Would I more importantly. No. We don't have the valid information.
So if you were to put it to public vote, then everyone would require the necassary information and case evidence. This would take months, if not years. And some people just do not have the nuance to understand the underlying issues.
So we put these decisions in the hands of people who should know better. We each as a town/city vote on candidates who then in turn make our decisions for us. ANd hence.....democracy.
It's not perfect, and it does get things wrong....but the important part of it is.....it gets things done, and easily....with the majority of decisions being in the general and world publics best interest
Anyway, going back to a few points I mentioned (and thanks for the comments :P) although you may not have voted for Tony or Labour, we all live in the same democratic society. It's everone's responsibilty. That's what people should comapign about not TB bein an idiot (genuinely what some people think is more important).
And to Alfonse's point about flaws in our society. There can be nothing but if you ask me. Every society and culture that has ever existed has issues, it just can't be perfect. The only way the war could have avoided all this is if it was voted on. By each and every individual.
This would have opened it's own problems. Take me and say pete_21 for example (sorry pete). If it was just down to us (for arguments sake) to decide, could we? Would I more importantly. No. We don't have the valid information.
So if you were to put it to public vote, then everyone would require the necassary information and case evidence. This would take months, if not years. And some people just do not have the nuance to understand the underlying issues.
So we put these decisions in the hands of people who should know better. We each as a town/city vote on candidates who then in turn make our decisions for us. ANd hence.....democracy.
It's not perfect, and it does get things wrong....but the important part of it is.....it gets things done, and easily....with the majority of decisions being in the general and world publics best interest
Page: