America has drawn a line under Iraq and so must we”

29 Sep 2010

Red Ed, said
"But I do believe that we were wrong. Wrong to take Britain to war and we need to be honest about that.
"Wrong because that war was not a last resort, because we did not build sufficient alliances and because we undermined the United Nations."
Is he right to say this?
He is now opposed to the war but has voted strongly against an investigation into it dunno

29 Sep 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
Red Ed, said
"But I do believe that we were wrong. Wrong to take Britain to war and we need to be honest about that.
"Wrong because that war was not a last resort, because we did not build sufficient alliances and because we undermined the United Nations."
Is he right to say this?
He is now opposed to the war but has voted strongly against an investigation into it

What do you think?

29 Sep 2010

Quote by Freckledbird
Red Ed, said
"But I do believe that we were wrong. Wrong to take Britain to war and we need to be honest about that.
"Wrong because that war was not a last resort, because we did not build sufficient alliances and because we undermined the United Nations."
Is he right to say this?
He is now opposed to the war but has voted strongly against an investigation into it

What do you think?
I never supported the war, so would have to agree with him to some extent. I would imagine he is also in danger of upsetting some of the big guns in the Labour party with this one
I also have suspicions about his motives, he knows it was an unpopular war with many voters and hopes to distance himself from it.

29 Sep 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
I also have suspicions about his motives, he knows it was an unpopular war with many voters and hopes to distance himself from it.

Yep :thumbup:

29 Sep 2010

I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

29 Sep 2010

Quote by deancannock
I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

I would agree with almost every thing you say Dean, except about Afghanistan, I do not believe you stop terrorist's by occupying a country, or by war, I believe the only thing we are achieving is creating more hate for the west. IMO the only way to sort such matters is by talking
*IN EDIT* I do fully support our troops in both cases, I just disagree with the people who sent them.

29 Sep 2010

Quote by deancannock
I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

I'd like to take issue with that point.
He was an evil bastard without doubt but you have to put this into the context of what he was managing. He managed to keep the lid on his warring neighbours quite effectively and for that he was a brilliant strategist. Look at the mess the country now is to see how effective he was. I think you're right; this was more to do with finishing off "daddy's war" than ridding the world of an evil dictator.
The way he was executed was appalling. His trial a sham.

29 Sep 2010

Quote by GnV
I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

I'd like to take issue with that point.
He was an evil bastard without doubt but you have to put this into the context of what he was managing. He managed to keep the lid on his warring neighbours quite effectively and for that he was a brilliant strategist. Look at the mess the country now is to see how effective he was. I think you're right; this was more to do with finishing off "daddy's war" than ridding the world of an evil dictator.
The way he was executed was appalling. His trial a sham.
Strange you should say that, I was talking to a solder the other day and he said a very similar thing
And yes the execution and trial were appalling

30 Sep 2010

Quote by deancannock
I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

both invasions deano form parts of the geostrategic plan to control oil/gas and mineral reserves in the richest deposit area of the planet which is eurasia.
all the bullshit we have been fed on since 9/11 (modern day pearl harbour) is clearly laid out chronologically in zibignew bzrezinski's 1997 book "the grand chessboard".
bzrezinski was an advisor to regan, carter, clinton and now obama. founding member of the trilateral commission and council on foreign relations and creator of the cia financed and trained "al quader", which as robin cook explained befor his untimely death, means data base in arabic.
so in the grand scheme of things (anglo-american primacy), iraq, afghanistan, uzbekistan, pakistan and iran are on the contrary, not totally different but one and the same. sorry deano, i thought you were cleverer than this. regards.

30 Sep 2010

Quote by gulsonroad30664
bzrezinski was an advisor to regan, carter,

"We're the sweeny son, and we haven't had our dinner yet"

30 Sep 2010

:laughabove::laughabove::laughabove:

30 Sep 2010

Quote by gulsonroad30664
I think.....the invasion of Afghanistan....in the light of 9/11 was something that was required. Terrorists were being trained there, and sent out to do spread the threat across the western world. had we not stoped this, they would have gone on to do more bigger and daring things !! I think we needed to curtail the exploits of the Taliban.
Iraq is totally differant. I think we rushed in.....and was more to do with Mr Bush's wish to finish off what his father started !! I think they thought it would be a push over....all the locals would welcome them with open arms, and they would be seen as conquering heroes. As we all know things didn't quite turn out that way. Ain't hindsight a wonderfull thing. I do think the removal of Saddam Hussian, has left the world a better place. What all investigations have concluded is the same, that no plan, for after the invasion was ever really thought out.
We can't now just say, right had enough we are off. We invaded this country, it is our duty to oversee a government of the peoples choice is in place, and upheld. We may not want to be, but think we will have a presence there for at least another 25 years or so.

both invasions deano form parts of the geostrategic plan to control oil/gas and mineral reserves in the richest deposit area of the planet which is eurasia.
all the bullshit we have been fed on since 9/11 (modern day pearl harbour) is clearly laid out chronologically in zibignew bzrezinski's 1997 book "the grand chessboard".
bzrezinski was an advisor to regan, carter, clinton and now obama. founding member of the trilateral commission and council on foreign relations and creator of the cia financed and trained "al quader", which as robin cook explained befor his untimely death, means data base in arabic.
so in the grand scheme of things (anglo-american primacy), iraq, afghanistan, uzbekistan, pakistan and iran are on the contrary, not totally different but one and the same. sorry deano, i thought you were cleverer than this. regards. whats more is
no iraqi or afghani was present or accused of the 9/11 attacks.
mohammed atta was accused of being the leader of the hi-jackers (a saudi citizen), they know this because they found his perfect condition green saudi passport at "ground zero"
the war on terror, if you ask iraqi's, afghani's, pakistani's or iranians, is a war of terror on them who, if you ask the pakistan isi or the indian intelligence services after mumbai, will tell you that the attacks in their countries were financed and controlled by british and american intelligence services.
we do not bring democracy or good governance to the region (how arrogant is that) but have overseen a thousand percent increase in opium/heroin production, abu grabe, millions displaced and hundreds of thousands killed and british and american forces military and civilian (mercenaries) will remain in the area for as long as it it necessary to extract the oil, gas and minerals and prevent china, india and russia from getting their hands on it.
it has absolutely nothing to do with world terrorism unless your on the recieving end of the invasions, occupations, cruise missiles, helcopter gunships, abrahams tanks, preditor drones and hellfire missiles.
i say again. read bzrezinski's book "the grand chessboard" written in 1997 and all will become absolutely clear.

30 Sep 2010

Quote by kentswingers777

yes kenty, it was all conspired by anglo american foreign policy makers in the early 1990's and is well documented in pnac (policy for the new american century) formulated by cheney, wolferwitz, rumsfeld and bush senior and planned by bzrezinski and kissenger as outlined in "the grand chessboard".
rather than dismiss my contribution as a "conspiracy theory", why not put it to the test of history and events and not what you have been led to believe by our honest politicians and truthfull media, you who saw through the "global warming" bollox. regards oh intelligent one.

30 Sep 2010