1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Saudi Arabia again - Saudi girl facing possible death in Bangkok Airport

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by dowie, Jan 7, 2019.

  1. h4rm0ny

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 4,466

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    So in summary, there are in fact LOTS of options between Invasion and Accept, but you don't care for them or think they'll cost us money.
     
  2. ianh

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 12, 2007

    Posts: 3,878

    Location: Stoke & Saudi

    I would suggest that he's saying that, while you've provided a multitude of options, none would be considered by the Government as rational ideas as none would have a realistic effect on Saudi culture (of than to make them laugh at us) and as such nothing we did would actually prevent Saudi doing whatever the hell it feels like other than changing the way the country works using Force. So as none of those those options would do anything to effect Saudi culture (which, again could really only be changed by Force), his statement of all those options being presented are "tantamount to complicity." would be correct, as unpalatable as that is.

    TL:DR - Nothing we do will ever change Saudi culture other than an utterly unrealistic use of Force.
     
  3. h4rm0ny

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 4,466

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    Well I highly doubt our government would consider invading SA over human rights, either, but that's not what he said. We don't have to guess his meaning. He wrote that our only options are either invasion or acceptance. That's blatantly wrong.
     
  4. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,550

    And yet it seems to be the reality as we grovelled to them right after they butchered Khashoggi with little transparency. The UK clearly has no power in this pitiful relationship.
     
  5. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 36,485

  6. Efour

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 8, 2005

    Posts: 23,586

    Location: Norrbotten, Sweden.

  7. ttaskmaster

    Soldato

    Joined: Sep 11, 2013

    Posts: 7,433

    Location: Reading, UK

    No, there are lots of possible things we could do, none of which would be considered viable as many of them leave us worse off, while doing absolutely..... NOTHING.... to change what they're doing. That inaction and failure to tackle or even address the actual issue is knowingly allowing it to continue. Complicity.

    Even when we've done exactly as you suggested and take the softly softly approach, they just fob us off, pay loads of money to our government and give them guided tours of blatantly staged scenes, which said government lap up as part of their well-paid trip. More complicity.

    Actually that is exactly what he said subsequently, and why he suggested invasion antecedently.

    We already tried your way and that was repeatedly shown to only make our government a bit richer and a bit fatter. Nothing else changed.
    We also have a long, proven history of successfully storming countries and improving their way of life, frequently without stuffing up their culture entirely. Something like a cross between America and the Roman Empire, really... and since we're leaving Europe, we might as well at least consider going back to doing what we did best. :D

    So yeah - Bleating and publicly saying you condemn a regime is meaningless, especially while actually doing nothing... and more so when you're actually taking 'gratuities' off said regime.
    If a country has laws different to your own, you respect and accept them. If they're so different that you find them unacceptable, you either learn to accept them or you go do something to change them. Making them richer in the process of stuffing up your own country is highly ineffective in that respect, and just retarded.
     
  8. VincentHanna

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 30, 2013

    Posts: 15,517

    Social media occasionally does have a positive effect.
     
  9. FishFluff

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 7, 2003

    Posts: 4,695

    Location: Deepest, darkest Leeds

    Probably an economic migrant as well rather than a 'refugee'!


    Am I doing this right?
     
  10. h4rm0ny

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 4,466

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    Not really.
     
  11. stockhausen

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 30, 2006

    Posts: 8,663

    I guess that Canada doesn't have any "defence" contracts with Saudi Arabia involving wholesale slaughter of innocents in Yemen ;)
     
  12. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 36,485

    Nice one Canada!

    Quite an amusing little **** you to the Saudis given their recent history :)
     
  13. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,550

    I would not put it past them to murder her when she's in Canada, right in the open. The problem with dealing with Terrorists is that you'll lose regardless.

    They're probably already setting up a butchering cell.

    For a country like ours to seemingly ignore this girl's plight (she's a renouncer so its not like it's helping a muslim over a christian), over some pitiful idea that our "soft" power in SA is more important... the fact is and always will be that we have zero power of them, they have the UK by the balls. Embarrassing.
     
  14. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 36,485

    Not sure that it was necessary for the UK to step in here. Australia was her chosen destination, they didn’t deny her but just said she’d not get any special treatment/would be processed like any other refugee.

    UN decided to ask Canada and given they’ve taken a public stance on women’s rights in Saudi then that makes sense.
     
  15. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,550

    Just because its not necessary, doesnt mean much when we're allegedly a lovely caring country willing to help out of the goodness of our heart.

    Instead we sell bullets that kill Yemen children every day, I imagine most Saudi's realise their relationship with the UK better than the UK does with it.
     
  16. robgmun

    Capodecina

    Joined: Apr 30, 2006

    Posts: 13,975

    She's too well know to be touched now, if they try to do anything SA will immediately be suspected

    Agreed, the UK should be pulling out of any deals with those ********
     
  17. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,550

    I don't think SA cares, the US wont do anything the UK wont do anything Russia wont and China wont... She's never ever going to be safe.
     
  18. stuman

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Aug 27, 2003

    Posts: 1,388

    Until the western world distances itself from oil and can sustain itself without it we will forever rely on them...
     
  19. Psycho Sonny

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 21, 2006

    Posts: 27,717

    Obviously the UK on it's ownnwouldbt make a difference. The eu, UN and the US would need to all put sanctions in place.

    They would quickly turn into Iran. Iran has oil but all the sanctions have turned it into a hole.

    Sanctions would work. The Saudi royals like to travel and spend lots of money. Just put all the same sanctions on them Iran has had in the past and currently has with the US.

    Also by preventing them selling oil wouldn't drive prices up. They have all been colluding to limit the supply to keep prices high.

    Also high oil prices is good for western countries that have oil like Scotland.
     
  20. Em3bbs

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 26, 2011

    Posts: 4,044

    Location: City of London

    Sadly I think you are right, and I think they will want to make an big example of her to stop anyone ever daring to try something similar.