The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
So...anyone following the news, especially Sky, CNN and Fox, will probably have noticed that there's major hints that a conflict with Iraq, led by a US/UK led force, is becoming a distinct possibility.
Its no longer, if, but when.
As soon as it does start there will be the usual protests, "negotiate" "stop the bombing" and so on. Saddam is refusing access to WMD sites, he's led the UN on a merry dance for 3 years now. As I see it attacking Iraq is the only option to guarantee we don't see weapons of mass destruction of Iraqi origin being used elsewhere. We, the UK, are the closest western target of note to Iraq.
Already, Mildenhall Air Show, that runs yearly in May, has been cancelled "due to operational requirements". This base is only involved in deploying special forces in Afghanistan. Previous air shows have gone ahead despite similar operations in previous years, such as the Balkans.
I don't want more conflicts, because life and the news pre 9/11 was much simpler, but I'd also like there to be a shot at peace sometime in the future, and with idiots like Saddam around thats not going to happen.
What does everyone else think ? (Braces self for usual cliched anti-american sentiment)
Its no longer, if, but when.
As soon as it does start there will be the usual protests, "negotiate" "stop the bombing" and so on. Saddam is refusing access to WMD sites, he's led the UN on a merry dance for 3 years now. As I see it attacking Iraq is the only option to guarantee we don't see weapons of mass destruction of Iraqi origin being used elsewhere. We, the UK, are the closest western target of note to Iraq.
Already, Mildenhall Air Show, that runs yearly in May, has been cancelled "due to operational requirements". This base is only involved in deploying special forces in Afghanistan. Previous air shows have gone ahead despite similar operations in previous years, such as the Balkans.
I don't want more conflicts, because life and the news pre 9/11 was much simpler, but I'd also like there to be a shot at peace sometime in the future, and with idiots like Saddam around thats not going to happen.
What does everyone else think ? (Braces self for usual cliched anti-american sentiment)
Page:
Well, that worked nicely, not to sure about the remake though. Oh, and i really should have stopped sending tapes back after the first one. Things sure went downhill in the sequels...
: )
: )
It's times like this i'd just like to get off this planet and let the ignorant monkeys blow themselves up.
Hmm, maybe i could be put into suspended animation and come back when the monkeys had taken over. Then make a film autobiography of all the fun me and my monkey friends would have. Then send it back it time to a few decades before now, and let them do a remake too, a bit later on.
Hmm, i wonder if any of the monkeys in the future will look like roddy mcdowell...
Hmm, maybe i could be put into suspended animation and come back when the monkeys had taken over. Then make a film autobiography of all the fun me and my monkey friends would have. Then send it back it time to a few decades before now, and let them do a remake too, a bit later on.
Hmm, i wonder if any of the monkeys in the future will look like roddy mcdowell...
Small Frog wrote:
Can I just point out that we have
> our own nuclear weapons pointed at various countries around the world? We are
> just as much as fault as Saddam
Get you facts right ! Do we hide our weapons away from the UN ? No. Do we shroud in secrecy what we have ? No. We have nuclear missiles launched from submarines whose location are secret. Are we threatening to use those againt a country that has done us no harm ? No. UK defence policy is that they are a nuclear deterrant. Someone attacks us with nuclear missiles then probably one of the last orders that will be given by the Prime Minister is to counter attack with that deterrant. Saddam is threatening to use his weapons against anyone unfriendly to Iraq. Just one SCUD launched nuclear missile or germ loaded missile into Israel will send the region up in flames.
So no, we are not at fault. And just to prove another point, our nuclear weapons are not "pointed" as you put it. Yes, they can be brought into a mode whereby they actuively target a location but unless they are on a close to war footing the missiles are not aimed at anything. Submarines are deployed in most likely areas of conflict. Secondly, other countries have the UK as a target, but again this is a deterrant. Saddam isnt interested in deterrants.
The way I see it, this problem is either sorted out soon or it will be a future generation we leave the problem to - we cant just stick our collective heads in the sand and ignore the problem - a skill that seems to be a growing national trait in this country.
Can I just point out that we have
> our own nuclear weapons pointed at various countries around the world? We are
> just as much as fault as Saddam
Get you facts right ! Do we hide our weapons away from the UN ? No. Do we shroud in secrecy what we have ? No. We have nuclear missiles launched from submarines whose location are secret. Are we threatening to use those againt a country that has done us no harm ? No. UK defence policy is that they are a nuclear deterrant. Someone attacks us with nuclear missiles then probably one of the last orders that will be given by the Prime Minister is to counter attack with that deterrant. Saddam is threatening to use his weapons against anyone unfriendly to Iraq. Just one SCUD launched nuclear missile or germ loaded missile into Israel will send the region up in flames.
So no, we are not at fault. And just to prove another point, our nuclear weapons are not "pointed" as you put it. Yes, they can be brought into a mode whereby they actuively target a location but unless they are on a close to war footing the missiles are not aimed at anything. Submarines are deployed in most likely areas of conflict. Secondly, other countries have the UK as a target, but again this is a deterrant. Saddam isnt interested in deterrants.
The way I see it, this problem is either sorted out soon or it will be a future generation we leave the problem to - we cant just stick our collective heads in the sand and ignore the problem - a skill that seems to be a growing national trait in this country.
"declare war ? We haven't declared war since 1941 ! We're going to war"
A quote from Wag The Dog.
The point of it ? People are saying that war against Iraq is going to be declared, and nobody really does that anymore, we just go to war !
cipro is right that Iraq does have more military than the Taliban/Al Queda ( remember we didnt go to war with Afghanistan, it was against those two groups....) The same distinction is here - the USA and its allies have no problem with the Iraqi people - a point maybe I should have made originally - its Saddam and those around him thats the problem. Iraq does have a mjor disadvantage - its terrain.
To quote Gen. Franks; "We don't do mountain, we do deserts."
A quote from Wag The Dog.
The point of it ? People are saying that war against Iraq is going to be declared, and nobody really does that anymore, we just go to war !
cipro is right that Iraq does have more military than the Taliban/Al Queda ( remember we didnt go to war with Afghanistan, it was against those two groups....) The same distinction is here - the USA and its allies have no problem with the Iraqi people - a point maybe I should have made originally - its Saddam and those around him thats the problem. Iraq does have a mjor disadvantage - its terrain.
To quote Gen. Franks; "We don't do mountain, we do deserts."
America to attack Iraq! How can they declare war on Iraq when they have yet to bring Afghanistan under control? That country doesn't even half the military force Iraq does. Bloody yanks for you too gung-ho.
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction pointed at us. He is capable of firing them.
To stop him doing this, we should declare war on him. If we declare war he wouldn't dare attack us. Yeah, right.
Can I just point out that we have our own nuclear weapons pointed at various countries around the world? We are just as much as fault as Saddam, but we have more negative press about him, since he is foreign. Because we are English, because we are friends with America, because we are *Western* we are always right.
Sure.
(Stalks off in an angry anti-patriotic mood)
To stop him doing this, we should declare war on him. If we declare war he wouldn't dare attack us. Yeah, right.
Can I just point out that we have our own nuclear weapons pointed at various countries around the world? We are just as much as fault as Saddam, but we have more negative press about him, since he is foreign. Because we are English, because we are friends with America, because we are *Western* we are always right.
Sure.
(Stalks off in an angry anti-patriotic mood)
Peaceful negotiation is an ideal solution, but there are places where it just won't work. Look at the Israel/Palestine situation at the moment.
As things currently stand I don't really see how 'Iraq in particular' are a major threat, but if the Americans (and know doubt us in toe) go in and bomb like there's no tomorrow, then this will increase the threat to the West tenfold.
I actually like America - the country and constitution etc, but their foreign policy is based near totally on violence. Peaceful negotiation guys. Lead by example, not by the smooth outer-coating of a heat-seeking missile.
I actually like America - the country and constitution etc, but their foreign policy is based near totally on violence. Peaceful negotiation guys. Lead by example, not by the smooth outer-coating of a heat-seeking missile.
As long as the Amerians don't ask for our help then it's fine... but if Iraq bomb is then it isn't.
But what am I saying about America asking to help us. They won't need to, Tony'll offer to help.
But what am I saying about America asking to help us. They won't need to, Tony'll offer to help.
I used to give a hoot about this stuff.
But then it hit me:
Nothing we say can or ever will change anything at all because we, as a people, do not have a voice.
Shout all you want, discuss all you want.
Doesn't matter.
Won't change a thing.
Personally, I would like to see all countries attack each other until nobody is left.
That way, maybe whatever managed to crawl from the primordial ooze would do a better job.
I'm not racist, I think all countries are equally at fault and nobody really deserves supremacy over anyone else.
Just my thoughts.
But then it hit me:
Nothing we say can or ever will change anything at all because we, as a people, do not have a voice.
Shout all you want, discuss all you want.
Doesn't matter.
Won't change a thing.
Personally, I would like to see all countries attack each other until nobody is left.
That way, maybe whatever managed to crawl from the primordial ooze would do a better job.
I'm not racist, I think all countries are equally at fault and nobody really deserves supremacy over anyone else.
Just my thoughts.
Page: