The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Jack Straws, just over a week old, comment that war in Iraq was a 60:40 against bet may well turn out to be one of the worst bets in recent history.
Why ? Ms Short, a government minister comparable in uselessness only to David Blunkett, has decided that, should the US act alone against Iraqm without the UN consent, then the UK will not support them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2649959.stm
Exsqueeze me ?
Is this woman completely clueless or something ? If the UK does not partner the US in any go it alone action then the US will have nobody to rein it in, or check its actions. Theres nothing quite like backing the US into a corner - as her statement has done - than a way of making it take action.
Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
Once again a government minister has given me one more reason why I dislike this country so much....
~~Belldandy~~
Why ? Ms Short, a government minister comparable in uselessness only to David Blunkett, has decided that, should the US act alone against Iraqm without the UN consent, then the UK will not support them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2649959.stm
Exsqueeze me ?
Is this woman completely clueless or something ? If the UK does not partner the US in any go it alone action then the US will have nobody to rein it in, or check its actions. Theres nothing quite like backing the US into a corner - as her statement has done - than a way of making it take action.
Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
Once again a government minister has given me one more reason why I dislike this country so much....
~~Belldandy~~
Did anyone see Newsnight yesterday, was hilarious seeing all the parties argue over the war but its even funnier because the torie guy even admitted to having the same views as mandelson, theyre all great
I'd love it if there was a split in the Labour ranks
Goatboy wrote:
> Dismissive, uninformed and missing the point.
>
> Yup, welcome to the debating channel
Indeed, lalakersrule has a valid point though. Much of Britain lives under the illusion we actually have some sort of power in todays world. We have very little outside our own country. We talk of sending forces to Iraq, and it turns out to be about 16 planes and a carrier e.t.c.
It's all a farce, too many in power and in the media believe we have some kind of empire, and with it, power. I'm not saying power is solely measured by military projection, but in part it is because it is through that you can enforce your will onto others. Look at it like this, if the 9/11 attacks had been on the UK, and we had lost that many people and so much more, and America turned round and said "nope you're on your own chaps, not our war", what could we do ?
Nothing, without allies we are nothing but an island off of Europe. We cannot, as some would like to think, live in and imagined peace and tranquility here, avoiding the outside world's problems, and ignoring them.
~~Belldandy~~
> Dismissive, uninformed and missing the point.
>
> Yup, welcome to the debating channel
Indeed, lalakersrule has a valid point though. Much of Britain lives under the illusion we actually have some sort of power in todays world. We have very little outside our own country. We talk of sending forces to Iraq, and it turns out to be about 16 planes and a carrier e.t.c.
It's all a farce, too many in power and in the media believe we have some kind of empire, and with it, power. I'm not saying power is solely measured by military projection, but in part it is because it is through that you can enforce your will onto others. Look at it like this, if the 9/11 attacks had been on the UK, and we had lost that many people and so much more, and America turned round and said "nope you're on your own chaps, not our war", what could we do ?
Nothing, without allies we are nothing but an island off of Europe. We cannot, as some would like to think, live in and imagined peace and tranquility here, avoiding the outside world's problems, and ignoring them.
~~Belldandy~~
Dismissive, uninformed and missing the point.
Yup, welcome to the debating channel
Yup, welcome to the debating channel
Belldandy wrote:
> Hip hip a flipping ray....at last one person who thinks the same as
> me.
>
> You do know we'll have Light bounding in here any moment....
>
> ~~Belldandy~~
i've read these messages for a while now and i do have to say you're one the few people who actually makes any sense to me. It's probably because you don't have burning old glory flags in your eyes you can actually make valid points and not just adopt the *ooooh America icky icky* attitude
> Hip hip a flipping ray....at last one person who thinks the same as
> me.
>
> You do know we'll have Light bounding in here any moment....
>
> ~~Belldandy~~
i've read these messages for a while now and i do have to say you're one the few people who actually makes any sense to me. It's probably because you don't have burning old glory flags in your eyes you can actually make valid points and not just adopt the *ooooh America icky icky* attitude
lalakersrule wrote:
> So perhaps America isn't the only country
> looking out for its own interests under the name of democracy. Of
> course the anti-american brigade in the media don't actually mention
> that but instead keep trying to find excuses why we shouldn't attack
> the nice man Saddam. (including the daily taliban mirror and the still
> living in the time when Britain actually had an empire Guardian.)
Hip hip a flipping ray....at last one person who thinks the same as me.
You do know we'll have Light bounding in here any moment....
~~Belldandy~~
> So perhaps America isn't the only country
> looking out for its own interests under the name of democracy. Of
> course the anti-american brigade in the media don't actually mention
> that but instead keep trying to find excuses why we shouldn't attack
> the nice man Saddam. (including the daily taliban mirror and the still
> living in the time when Britain actually had an empire Guardian.)
Hip hip a flipping ray....at last one person who thinks the same as me.
You do know we'll have Light bounding in here any moment....
~~Belldandy~~
Belldandy wrote:
> Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action
> then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also
> fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
That's no myth that's truth with perhaps the exception of the UK but we're just blindly following in anyway. Every country says they want terrorism to stop but don't actually want to act on it so they just wag their finger at the terrorists and hope they won't do it again. Also is it any surprise that France and Russia, 2 countries who were opposed to war in Iraq had their own interests in it? France is owed $3 billion by Iraq so obviously wouldn't want them to get blown to bits as they wouldn't get their money back and Russia had recently signed a oil deal with Iraq. So perhaps America isn't the only country looking out for its own interests under the name of democracy. Of course the anti-american brigade in the media don't actually mention that but instead keep trying to find excuses why we shouldn't attack the nice man Saddam. (including the daily taliban mirror and the still living in the time when Britain actually had an empire Guardian.)
> Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action
> then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also
> fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
That's no myth that's truth with perhaps the exception of the UK but we're just blindly following in anyway. Every country says they want terrorism to stop but don't actually want to act on it so they just wag their finger at the terrorists and hope they won't do it again. Also is it any surprise that France and Russia, 2 countries who were opposed to war in Iraq had their own interests in it? France is owed $3 billion by Iraq so obviously wouldn't want them to get blown to bits as they wouldn't get their money back and Russia had recently signed a oil deal with Iraq. So perhaps America isn't the only country looking out for its own interests under the name of democracy. Of course the anti-american brigade in the media don't actually mention that but instead keep trying to find excuses why we shouldn't attack the nice man Saddam. (including the daily taliban mirror and the still living in the time when Britain actually had an empire Guardian.)
I will be amazed, nay! astounded if there isn't military action against Iraq - (it isn't a "war" because only one side can win).
They all know it's ON already don't they.... just a few nobs in suits to whip into line at the U.N. and Boom! let the fireworks display begin.
They all know it's ON already don't they.... just a few nobs in suits to whip into line at the U.N. and Boom! let the fireworks display begin.
Jack Straws, just over a week old, comment that war in Iraq was a 60:40 against bet may well turn out to be one of the worst bets in recent history.
Why ? Ms Short, a government minister comparable in uselessness only to David Blunkett, has decided that, should the US act alone against Iraqm without the UN consent, then the UK will not support them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2649959.stm
Exsqueeze me ?
Is this woman completely clueless or something ? If the UK does not partner the US in any go it alone action then the US will have nobody to rein it in, or check its actions. Theres nothing quite like backing the US into a corner - as her statement has done - than a way of making it take action.
Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
Once again a government minister has given me one more reason why I dislike this country so much....
~~Belldandy~~
Why ? Ms Short, a government minister comparable in uselessness only to David Blunkett, has decided that, should the US act alone against Iraqm without the UN consent, then the UK will not support them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2649959.stm
Exsqueeze me ?
Is this woman completely clueless or something ? If the UK does not partner the US in any go it alone action then the US will have nobody to rein it in, or check its actions. Theres nothing quite like backing the US into a corner - as her statement has done - than a way of making it take action.
Look at it like this; If the UK will not ally with a non UN US action then that removes the final reason to go with the UN process, it also fuels the myth of America being the only ones willing to act.
Once again a government minister has given me one more reason why I dislike this country so much....
~~Belldandy~~