Just sitting here watching sky news and it looks like we're going in tommorrow hope they do a propper job this time and take that twat out,spoke to the old man last nite he reckons things are getting a bit tense out there:(

 

lets just hope they sort things out quickly cheers

 

Marc:)

yup with any luck, it will be nice and quick.

hope they catch him and hang him live or hand him over to the Kurds.

Don't beat around the bush Warren. Say what you mean!

War doesn't prove who is right, only who is left.

f*** Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and the Idiot-in-charge Bush.

Come on boys my brother's out there..

yer it s on I think they decide weeks a go lets hope its over soon and it does no start things off big time in the east.

 

jay

IF DEAD MEN COULD TALK,THERE WOULD BE NO WARS!

yer you right we all forget to easy:(

Just as well there was no hippys in 1940,

i can imagine it now

"You cant kill nazi's, Hitler isnt all bad, lets send food and blankets instead"

 

Just as well we dont shoot traitors nowadays isnt it :D:D:D

Here here, hey paul when you next playin out round town??

Originally posted by gavo

Here here, hey paul when you next playin out round town??

 

Gavo change your profile so you can recieve e mail and i will get in touch

;)

I love the smell of mustard gas in the morning!

 

Let's get into it, sort out what should have been done over a decade ago!

 

Yippy aiii aaaaa motherfvckers!!! :D

nuke em twice i say

Originally posted by senna

f*** Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and the Idiot-in-charge Bush.

What makes you right and them wrong?

If your so against it why not go and become a human shield?

(no offense intended) just cant get my head around why people live in a country like this and live the lifestyle you are allowed because of what everyone has done and is doing to allow you to continue living this way, only to go and be as anti everything as possible? so why not go out if you feel strongly enough about it and do something about it? (i know that did not make sense lol)

Originally posted by vinz

IF DEAD MEN COULD TALK,THERE WOULD BE NO WARS!

 

really?!?!?

 

what about all the innoccent dead people that have died then, do you think that they would not want someone to put an end to the horrors that occour???

 

if i died in war so that my family could survive, then so be it.

Originally posted by 300z

What makes you right and them wrong?

If your so against it why not go and become a human shield?

(no offense intended) just cant get my head around why people live in a country like this and live the lifestyle you are allowed because of what everyone has done and is doing to allow you to continue living this way, only to go and be as anti everything as possible? so why not go out if you feel strongly enough about it and do something about it? (i know that did not make sense lol)

 

That's because he talks TOTAL FOOKIN BOLLOCKS! come on Warren you must know that by now!

 

 

I say cut off his scruffy hair fit him a hard hat and send him in,let him see what the real world is all about not fantasy land:D;)

Originally posted by Paul C

if i died in war so that my family could survive, then so be it.

Now this I agree with 100%

I suspect that I am not alone, in finding myself horribly in two minds on the subject of an imminent war in Iraq.

 

On the one hand, Saddam Hussein in undeniably a brutal, murderous dictator. In an ideal world, the Iraqi people would long ago have deposed him and brought him to justice. In addition, the world would be a better place without ANY weapons of mass destruction, ANY terrorism, and ANY oppression of peoples by their governments. Iraq is as good a place as any, to embark on these noble causes.

 

On the other hand, the Bush Administration does not appear to be acting from any of these motives. Rather the motive is a thinly veiled desire for Full Spectrum Domination, including control of the spigot for the marginal flow and hence cost of oil. Hence, the consequences for Iraqis of this war are unknowable at this time.

 

On an incidental note (having run out of hands) I think that the international community comes out of this looking very good. All nations have indulged in extremely robust and urgent debate of this very emotive issue, at both grass root and governmental levels. The permanent members of the security council have all taken principalled (albeit differing) positions. The elected members of the security council have largely refused to take sides, rather insisting on voting on substantive motions.

Blair's motive of keeping Bush multilateral, Chirac, Putin's and Schoeder's motive of keeping war as the option of last resort, are both noble ones.

 

I suspect that the extremity of the assertions by both sides of the arguement (War or you're an idiot, Peace or you're an idiot), is probably born from the weaknesses of the arguements on both sides, rather than their strengths.

I was in two minds myself until recently.....well until the French said they would veto any further resolutions. Sorry, but WHAT THE FCUK ARE THE FRENCH DOING ON THE SECURITY COUNCIL IN THE FIRST PLACE!!???!?!?! They're ALWAYS the first to roll over and get butt fcucked by whoever!

 

I was feeling really sorry for the general Iraqi population who will be badly effected by this, until I spoke to some Iraqis over here who agreed that it should have been done YEARS ago. They would rather put up with a 'short sharp' war to get rid of the bloke with the 'tache so their families still over there can live without fear of his goons every day of their lives.

 

At the end of the day it's about time we went out into the world again and kicked some ass! I'm fed up with feeling like I have to appologise for being English/British!

Originally posted by Wonk

I suspect that I am not alone, in finding myself horribly in two minds on the subject of an imminent war in Iraq.

 

On the one hand, Saddam Hussein in undeniably a brutal, murderous dictator. In an ideal world, the Iraqi people would long ago have deposed him and brought him to justice. In addition, the world would be a better place without ANY weapons of mass destruction, ANY terrorism, and ANY oppression of peoples by their governments. Iraq is as good a place as any, to embark on these noble causes.

 

On the other hand, the Bush Administration does not appear to be acting from any of these motives. Rather the motive is a thinly veiled desire for Full Spectrum Domination, including control of the spigot for the marginal flow and hence cost of oil. Hence, the consequences for Iraqis of this war are unknowable at this time.

 

On an incidental note (having run out of hands) I think that the international community comes out of this looking very good. All nations have indulged in extremely robust and urgent debate of this very emotive issue, at both grass root and governmental levels. The permanent members of the security council have all taken principalled (albeit differing) positions. The elected members of the security council have largely refused to take sides, rather insisting on voting on substantive motions.

Blair's motive of keeping Bush multilateral, Chirac, Putin's and Schoeder's motive of keeping war as the option of last resort, are both noble ones.

 

I suspect that the extremity of the assertions by both sides of the arguement (War or you're an idiot, Peace or you're an idiot), is probably born from the weaknesses of the arguements on both sides, rather than their strengths.

do some research on Oil usage around the world, i think youll be suprised by your findings, Epsecially where the US is concerned.

.

 

The UN come out of this looking exactly how they always have - a pathetic bunch of losers who couldent make a desicion if there lives depended on it.

France= well France lol - never won a war, Never will.

Germany - no exlanation needed :D

Russia = Iraq owe them a fortune - nuff said.

 

And do you actually know what the Bush administration think?

No specualtion ect - I mean do you have inside info on what they Know/think/what there plans are ect?

 

Assumption is the mother of all ****ups and its pretty obvious who is assuming at the moment.

Originally posted by 300z

What makes you right and them wrong?

If your so against it why not go and become a human shield?

(no offense intended) just cant get my head around why people live in a country like this and live the lifestyle you are allowed because of what everyone has done and is doing to allow you to continue living this way, only to go and be as anti everything as possible? so why not go out if you feel strongly enough about it and do something about it? (i know that did not make sense lol)

 

Warren, I couldn't have put that better myself mate!

 

CLASS!!!

300z,

 

I am afraid that I do not quite understand your points.

 

I followed your suggestion, and researched oil usage around the world, and discovered this:

Oil reserves have declined to the point that annual US oil consumption is now equivalent to about 1/4 of total proven reserves. This means that, if the USA had to supply its own oil, and no new discoveries occurred, its oil would be gone in four years! By importing over 60% of its oil, the inevitable is being postponed.

 

The USA is generally considered to have passed the Hubbert Peak for Oil Production in 1970 (The Hubbert Peak is the point at which half of the Ultimate total of a resource has been used, and so production of that resource can only inevitably decline until it is completed depleted).

 

I also notice that the Bush Administration is dominated by people from the oil industry.

 

The Bush Administration thinking is generally considered to be encompassed in the Project for the New American Century http://www.newamericancentury.org/ The proponents of this thinking (Perl, Remsfeld, Cheney etc.) are very proud of it, and hence it is no secret. The idea of a Democratic Domino effect in the Middle East initiated by regime change in Iraq is common currency in US based Right Wing think tanks since 1997.

 

You appear to be asserting that all the permanent members of the UN Security Council are acting in their own selfish interests with the exception of the USA and UK, who are acting with God on their side, with the sole rationale that you agree with that side of the arguement.

 

Lastly, please be aware that my arguement explicitly states that I am as yet undecided as to whether the imminent war will be on balance a good thing or a bad thing.

yeah no worries nice open debate everyone is allowed there own opinion, my point being, everyone is very much against two countrus because they are making a stand for what they see as right. After what happened to America - its pretty obvious why they are taking the option they are taking. Oil consumption for the US last year was made up of a total of 13% of Arab oil supplys, harldy a massive figure, now everyone can specualte all they like about this and that and how they want this and that - but figures speak for themselves and based on oil consumption in the last few years they are not reliant on ARAB oil as such (yet) lol.

 

As for the other countrys in the UN who is to say they are not selfish and acting in there won interests?

And while im at it since when did people like Saddam Hussain become "good guys" because thats pretty much how alot of people prtray them.

Prevention is far better than the cure.

Three things you never discuss in life are RELIGION (we know what a load of KAK that is lol) Politics (all this will go no where) and SEX lol. Guarenteed to cause an argument lol

I am pro war yes, because the UN passes a resolution saying - Disarm, - IRAQ do nothing about it, and the UN fail to act on it, like they have done over and over and over and over again. Someon has to do something and my belief is the US and GB are doing the correct thing.

Remember in life the general concensus of people who are anti something will always make a bigger effort to protest ect - where as people who know or belive its the right thing to do - dont go around campaigning what they know or believ is correct to begin with. Hence why you see 1000 000 million people marching in London and another 59 000 000 million sitting at home laughing :D

Originally posted by Wonk

Lastly, please be aware that my arguement explicitly states that I am as yet undecided as to whether the imminent war will be on balance a good thing or a bad thing.

Which is the ideal point of view really. If the war goes well you can say that you weren't sure a war was the correct course of action, but you supported "our boys" once it started (see The Mirror). If it goes tits up you can say that you didn't support it in the first place! ;)

 

Frankly, if Saddam had really felt that the UN were prepared to unite and use force if required, I suspect he may have cooperated more fully. Unfortunately, when 2 permanent members of the security council make it clear that they are happy for him to continue his delaying tactics indefinitely, any power the UN had is massively diminished.

Originally posted by Dave Marley

Unfortunately, when 2 permanent members of the security council make it clear that they are happy for him to continue his delaying tactics indefinitely, any power the UN had is massively diminished.

 

 

Yeah! So can we kick the shit out of the French now?!