Terror Plot Foiled

[mightynimrod]

Rubbish. The argies were a bunch of facists who murdered anyone they even thought was a leftie. As if the Russians would help them not that they had the capability to project force into the S Atlantic

Guess that told me

 

[VIRII]

Back then you were young, now your an adult with a family. Also I do think there is a bit of the old rose tinted specs here.

Yes that is definitely all possible. However that all said there is something about the notion of a suicide bomber on UK soil that is more horrific than anything I recall from the IRA.

 

[mightynimrod]

my father was in the navy in the falklands his ship was hit and sunk, he lost many friends. Such a pointless loss for something that didn't belong to us, nothing more than hills. Why bother? (Other than election results...)

Sorry to hear that mate...

 

[Jet]

Defending a land of ours from invasion by a foreign power, right?

The ONLY solid good reason for putting men and women of our own in the line of fire.


Saddam was a jackass (there you go, word used just for you ) but how many more will now die in the crossfire caused by this rift? And the only way we can prevent it? By laying down the lives of British and American servicemen to protect their people.

Seriously it hurts me real bad everytime I see the "Brtish servicemen killed at checkpoint by suicide car bomber" headline. To die on foreign soil fighting to "free" someone else's nation gutting.

Were the Taliban not a foreign power? And could it not be argued that SH was, since he ruled without the support of the people through corruption and force?

Secondly SH killed MILLIONS, it will take a long time to hit that figure and go beyond. And that's ignoring the freedom aspect.

Thirdly, it hurts me too but I also feel pride.

 

[VIRII]

my father was in the navy in the falklands his ship was hit and sunk, he lost many friends. Such a pointless loss for something that didn't belong to us, nothing more than hills. Why bother? (Other than election results...)

Was he on the Sheffield?
I know it seems a terrible loss but there were many men and women on those Islands who deserved our protection as much as you or I do.
There was also the political and tactical importance of holding onto the Islands, not to mention the mineral and oil rights that ownership affords.

 

[Sumanji]

At a time when the civilians are now free.

Free?

A McDonalds in Iraq is a laughble probable cause for the liberation, so i'll ignore that and say...

Do you also find it laughable that through propagation of American industry and business in to Iraq (not to mention the propagation of oil out of Iraq), the USA stands to make Billions of Dollars in profit? I personally find that disgusting.

I disagree that the US ONLY attack when there is something in it for them. These wars have cost billions upon billions. It will take a long time to recoup that money.

And that's where McDonald's and Exxon-Mobil come in to help

 

[Biohazard]

Was he on the Sheffield?
I know it seems a terrible loss but there were many men and women on those Islands who deserved our protection as much as you or I do.
There was also the political and tactical importance of holding onto the Islands, not to mention the mineral and oil rights that ownership affords.

Can't remember the ship name, can only remember the more recent ones before he completed his 25. I would ask him, only you can tell that its not stories that like to be recounted.

Oil seems to be a re-occuring theme in the greater sheme of things, if the islands were a brilliant source of I don't know, say limestone, I'm sure concern would have not been so great and costly

 

[VIRII]

Oil seems to be a re-occuring theme in the greater sheme of things, if the islands were a brilliant source of I don't know, say limestone, I'm sure concern would have not been so great and costly

Maggie would have sent the task force off even if they only had penguins on them, she had no choice. My Father used to send us drawings that he made of penguins when he was out there (he stayed on beyond the war).
It's funny the things you remember.

 

[Sumanji]

my father was in the navy in the falklands his ship was hit and sunk, he lost many friends. Such a pointless loss for something that didn't belong to us, nothing more than hills. Why bother? (Other than election results...)

Sorry to hear that but as VIRII said, they were protecting Brtish citizens there. I would certainly expect the army to come to the rescue if I was living in a British colony.

Were the Taliban not a foreign power?

Correct, and when did they launch an attack on a British colony?

And could it not be argued that SH was, since he ruled without the support of the people through corruption and force?

A large proportion of the populous did support him (rather foolishly, but still their land, their choice). In GW1 I agree, we totally did the right thing by going in to Kuwait and slapping his wrists. But I see no solid reason why our troops are there now. Are you saying you would be willing to join the Army put your life on the line to "liberate" these people?

Thirdly, it hurts me too but I also feel pride.

"Soldiers of the Royal British Army died today, fighting to save innocent civilians being invaded by a hostile force"
~ Pride

"Soldiers of the Royal British Army died today, whilst standing guard at a checkpoint in front of an Exxon oil pipeline in Iraq"
~Disgust

 

[Al Vallario]

These wars have cost billions upon billions. It will take a long time to recoup that money.

I just had a think about this and decided to perform some calculations...

According to costofwar.com (probably not the best source of statistics, granted, but as an estimate I guess they're somewhere in the ballpark) the war in Iraq has cost £160,138,612,000 so far. This site estimates the world population at about 6.63bn. That means that the war in Iraq has cost £24 for every single person on Earth. On the other hand, this would only cost each U.S. citizen about £550 each — a figure which I'm sure shouldn't be too difficult to recoup through taxes over a period of 2-3 years.

That said, the war in Iraq has cost one hell of a lot of money which — in my opinion, at least — could be better spent elsewhere...

 

[Zip]

Are you saying you would be willing to join the Army put your life on the line to "liberate" these people?

Im considering as we speak and have been for a few months now

 

[Sumanji]

Im considering as we speak and have been for a few months now

That's great, I've a lot of respect for men and women in the armed forces that's why if I was PM I would only risk losing these brave people if it was absolutely necessary to maintain the freedoms of our nation.

I did seriously consider joining the Medical Corps in a few years back, before all this GW2 malarchy started. Finally decided that the attitude towards utilising the army is far too blasé, and I'd be damned if I was to end up as a plastic field medic in Bush's toy collection

 

[Jet]

Free?



Do you also find it laughable that through propagation of American industry and business in to Iraq (not to mention the propagation of oil out of Iraq), the USA stands to make Billions of Dollars in profit? I personally find that disgusting.



And that's where McDonald's and Exxon-Mobil come in to help

Yes. Free. That link was an example of such a minor incident that occurs with less than 1% of soldiers and doesn't affect the Iraqi people at all.

Iraq will make billions from oil sales to the US. Not disgusting at all. The US will use their own construction companies et al because it's easier to organise, monitor and give an assurance that the Iraqis cannot give. Especially as it is on the brink of war as you put it. Do you think in the future US companies will have much influence in a muslim country? I think not.

McDonalds have restaurants in many countries. And I don't think America has McDonalds at the forefront of it's mind when going to war. A restaurant in Bagdhad is not going to greatly add to America's multi-trillion dollar economy.

Like-wise with Exxon-Mobil, 3 of the other top oil companies aren't even American. Are America going to make sure Exxon get it all? And this doesn't explain why oil production is at an all time low since the war started.

 

[Sleepy]

From Cox & Forkum

 

[Jet]

Sorry to hear that but as VIRII said, they were protecting Brtish citizens there. I would certainly expect the army to come to the rescue if I was living in a British colony.




Correct, and when did they launch an attack on a British colony?



A large proportion of the populous did support him (rather foolishly, but still their land, their choice). In GW1 I agree, we totally did the right thing by going in to Kuwait and slapping his wrists. But I see no solid reason why our troops are there now. Are you saying you would be willing to join the Army put your life on the line to "liberate" these people?



"Soldiers of the Royal British Army died today, fighting to save innocent civilians being invaded by a hostile force"
~ Pride

"Soldiers of the Royal British Army died today, whilst standing guard at a checkpoint in front of an Exxon oil pipeline in Iraq"
~Disgust

They didn't launch an attack on a British colony but in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, neither are capable of protecting themselves. Your opinion is that because it isn't affecting our country directly we shouldn't help. I disagree.

A large percentage maybe. Not the majority. Not if they knew the truth. Everyone in the army has a choice of whether to join and they can also quit if they don't agree with the decisions. I would be happy fighting to free any people whatsoever. Wether they were British or not.

Link to how may have died protecting oil pipelines?

And how much do you think Iraq depends on oil exportation to survive? 95% of its economy comes from oil. Without it, they die.

And regardless, I take pride in any soldier in Iraq, no matter what the job, providing it furthers that country's progress. It's regrettable that soldiers are needed to protect oil pipelines but that's the situation we're in.

 

[Jet]

That's great, I've a lot of respect for men and women in the armed forces that's why if I was PM I would only risk losing these brave people if it was absolutely necessary to maintain the freedoms of our nation.

But you agreed with helping Kuwait. Which didn't help the UK at all. We weren't threatened or affected. In what way have these 2 wars been different. SH occupies Kuwait against the will of the people and he did the same in Iraq. The taliban did the same in Afghanistan.

Why then did you support the allies in Kuwait but not in these instances?

 

[dirtydog]

But you agreed with helping Kuwait. Which didn't help the UK at all. We weren't threatened or affected. In what way have these 2 wars been different. SH occupies Kuwait against the will of the people and he did the same in Iraq. The taliban did the same in Afghanistan.

Why then did you support the allies in Kuwait but not in these instances?

How can Saddam 'occupy' Iraq? He is an Iraqi and was the legitimate president, as recognised by the international community including the US and UK for many years. In fact they put him into power in the first place

 

[dirtydog]

I disagree that the US ONLY attack when there is something in it for them. These wars have cost billions upon billions. It will take a long time to recoup that money.

This is off topic and has been discussed at length before, but the US didn't invade Iraq to make cash profits out of it per se. The two main reasons as I and others see it are: to secure the supply of Iraq's oil (note the important distinction between having the oil and realising cash profits from selling it) and to prevent Saddam from selling his oil in euros, which would have led to the collapse of the US dollar and the US economy if other countries followed suit.

The US economy is on a foundation of quicksand and the only thing keeping it from going under is that oil is traded in US dollars. If you buy or sell oil, anywhere in the world, you gotta buy US dollars from the US Treasury to do it. That is the only thing keeping the US from going down the toilet.

 

[VIRII]

How can Saddam 'occupy' Iraq? He is an Iraqi and was the legitimate president, as recognised by the international community including the US and UK for many years. In fact they put him into power in the first place

I think the inference was that he was in power against the will of the people of Iraq which is (we are lked to believe) true.

 

[VIRII]

This is off topic and has been discussed at length before, but the US didn't invade Iraq to make cash profits out of it per se. The two main reasons as I and others see it are: to secure the supply of Iraq's oil (note the important distinction between having the oil and realising cash profits from selling it) and to prevent Saddam from selling his oil in euros, which would have led to the collapse of the US dollar and the US economy if other countries followed suit.

The US economy is on a foundation of quicksand and the only thing keeping it from going under is that oil is traded in US dollars. If you buy or sell oil, anywhere in the world, you gotta buy US dollars from the US Treasury to do it. That is the only thing keeping the US from going down the toilet.

I'm not sure that the US would go down the toilet as such but certainly it would have a major affect on the value of the dollar. It would make American exports relatively very cheap but it would also mean things they imported were very expensive. It could be "the making" of America as they would have to become something of a net exporter.