Would you support another war?
- Thread starter Skyfire
- Start date
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
Al Vallario said:
I think he was thinking about this in Speakers Corner:
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2...AdmitsItWeInvadedIraqForTheOil.htm&frame=true
Skyfire said:Sorry, lost the linkBut I meant natural raw materials like diamonds, metals and oil
Let me get this straight? Bush was interviewed and he admitted that the reason America went to war with Iraq was for the natural raw materials?
Who interviewed him?
Yeah well so much for securing the Oil in Iraq. How are we going exploit it when the Country is up in flames? They didnt think about that, did they?
It would have been easier to have spent a fraction of those hundreds of billions of dollars spent on the war simply BRIBING Saddam Hussein. Cost benefit analysis anyone?
Same with 'War on Terror'. Why should we help the yanks? Did they help us with the IRA? Did they heck. If we had flattened the Republic like they have Iraq and Afghanistan they'd be whinging their butts off.
It would have been easier to have spent a fraction of those hundreds of billions of dollars spent on the war simply BRIBING Saddam Hussein. Cost benefit analysis anyone?
Same with 'War on Terror'. Why should we help the yanks? Did they help us with the IRA? Did they heck. If we had flattened the Republic like they have Iraq and Afghanistan they'd be whinging their butts off.
@if ®afiq said:
Thats a horrifically naive comment. Your blaming the soldiers who are doing their job. Blame the government.
Not only that but do you know how carefull brittish soldiers are about shooting people? They dont shoot unless shot at for fear of being prosecuted now thanks to people going over the top and not being behind our soldiers trying to protect themselves in a dangerous environment they are now dieing for fear of being prosecuted for shooting the wrong person. We are an extremly human armed force in comparison to say...the americans or...the partisans we are now fighting there.
Your comment is based on no fact and is completly naive. I think you need to grow up a hell of a lot and form an actual argument instead of blaming something you know sod all about!
Hugogo said:
If a soldier gives up his conscience and surrenders himself to the will of the government - then in my eyes he is equally culpable. Just because he is a soldier - it does not mean he is no longer a human acapable of knowing right from wrong.
Hugogo said:
War is never humane - I don't care how "careful" British soldiers are. Civilians will always get killed. We are currently in a coalition so will get tarred with the same brush (i.e. responsible for the deaths of 650,000 Iraqi's).
Hugogo said:
My comment is based on the fact the many civilians get killed in war. This is the reality of war - the death of 250,000 innocent people at the hands of the coalition. Not surgical strikes, smart bombs and camera shots of "shock and awe". You have in Iraq the complete destruction and very near break-up of a country - that is war.
I think I am more than aware of what war entails - you do not have to be in the army or play CS to know this. It's simple: War is death.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
Propaganda is nothing new and it was used long before the Nazis' scourged the Earth. We see it today.
I have to, on principle, support British troops wherever they go and as long as they follow rules of engagement as it is not for them to question where they go.
I will support a war that is justified, taking the Falkand's War of 1982 as an example. It was British sovereign territory and was invaded by the Argentinians', claiming it was theirs. The Task Force assembled by then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was sent and the islands were re-taken at a sad cost of 258 British lives, as well as over 600 Argentinan. That war was justified to me. Here though, I go O/T.
Should Iran and North Korea not cease their intentions and developments to have nuclear arms, then I will support whatever action that is needed to stop that unless there is a massive change in their policy where agreements for civil use only can be agreed, actioned and monitored.
If that is sanctions then all the better, but if by military action then as much as I don't wish to see that, I could not help but support it.
Recent testing in North Korea has grave cause for concern for stability in the region and Japan's restraint in not developing nuclear weapons despite being probably the most technologically advanced nation on Earth is admirable, although they will not sit around if North Korea continues.
@if .... you are way off, blinkered almost.
I have to, on principle, support British troops wherever they go and as long as they follow rules of engagement as it is not for them to question where they go.
I will support a war that is justified, taking the Falkand's War of 1982 as an example. It was British sovereign territory and was invaded by the Argentinians', claiming it was theirs. The Task Force assembled by then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was sent and the islands were re-taken at a sad cost of 258 British lives, as well as over 600 Argentinan. That war was justified to me. Here though, I go O/T.
Should Iran and North Korea not cease their intentions and developments to have nuclear arms, then I will support whatever action that is needed to stop that unless there is a massive change in their policy where agreements for civil use only can be agreed, actioned and monitored.
If that is sanctions then all the better, but if by military action then as much as I don't wish to see that, I could not help but support it.
Recent testing in North Korea has grave cause for concern for stability in the region and Japan's restraint in not developing nuclear weapons despite being probably the most technologically advanced nation on Earth is admirable, although they will not sit around if North Korea continues.
@if .... you are way off, blinkered almost.
Last edited:
@if ®afiq said:
Let me ask you this question.
You are Eye to eye with an Enemy soldier In a town with civilian around, He is hiding among the Civilians and using them as shields while firing upon you and there is a good chance he will kill you if you dont do anything about it.
What would you do?
@if ®afiq said:
Its not surrendering yourself to the 'will of the government' its doing a job that at the end of the day has helped hundreds of thousands. Yes war is horrific i havent argued that.
You also cant say that the brittish forces are baby killers and murderers look at all the amazing work done by the UN (which we play a very large role in). The amount of civil wars and unrest stopped by the forces is massive. All the charity going to these war torn countries would not be possible without the help and constant support given by our forces.
The work done in Kosovo siera leone rwanda to name but a few places has helped so many people.
For someone to put on their uniform and step up to help those who are less fortunate for a very small wage and with massive personal risk speaks wonders about them and to be little their achievements and struggles is a mistake.
I will admit that bad things have happend and that attrocities could have been stopped. I dont aggree with the Iraq war, or going to war in Iran. But at this time of year when we are tasked with remembering those millions who died to preseve your way of life and you are calling them baby killers speaks wonders about you.
@if ®afiq said:
I believe that one is called patriotism...
The whole point of being a soldier, you follow orders. you may think they are wrong, you may question them and have it noted, but I am under the impression that they are orders, not requests.
Equally, I would support the troops, but I would be opposed to any further war. Having read about the problems being associated with the current undertakings of the armed forces, I do not see this as a feasible option unless conscription was introduced...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
@if ®afiq said:
When I see a Muslim, I do not label them all as suicide bombers or someone who will kill themselves and others. When I see a black man, I do not label them all off as crack dealing lowlife or muggers. When I see a British soldier on the streets of Iraq or Afghanistan, I do not see a robotic killing machine that indiscriminitely kills women, children or civilians in general and I also have the common sense to see that it is the government who send troops into theatres of war. The military is an executive arm of the Government to use as they see fit and if I disagree with wars that they fight, I levy my anger towards the Government and not the troops themselves.
In other words ... I do not generalise.
Back at you ... why not ?
Last edited:
yes I would, afghan supported terrorists, saddam gased his "own" people.
where the hell did Bush say it was for oil? link please.,........ (or hace you been got by the propagands)
I would rather not support a war. But the one organistation that could stop it, has smaller teeth than a teddy bear. The Un should come down hard and fast when ANY country disobayes them. However thats never going to happen so it's a waste of money.At least america has the balls to do what they believe is right.
I dont think we should have been lied to WMD, I think tony blair should be removed from office, but I did and would again support a war.
where the hell did Bush say it was for oil? link please.,........ (or hace you been got by the propagands)
I would rather not support a war. But the one organistation that could stop it, has smaller teeth than a teddy bear. The Un should come down hard and fast when ANY country disobayes them. However thats never going to happen so it's a waste of money.At least america has the balls to do what they believe is right.
I dont think we should have been lied to WMD, I think tony blair should be removed from office, but I did and would again support a war.
War is the continuation of political discourse by other means. If we have a problem with another country, they won't come around to our way of thinking, and military action is justifiable, then why the devil not. It's what I'm paid to do 
Hugogo said:
Well if that is the case then what would you say of the Nazi soldier gaurding an extermination camp. Is he free of any responsibilty as he was just following orders?
Hugogo said:
I don't know much about Kosovo, but IIRC the UN was heavily criticsed for it's inaction with Rwanda and Siera Leonne - and both countries are still in aterrible state - I may be wrong on this.
Hugogo said:
What makes you think the people join the army to help others? That is a very big assumption to make.
Hugogo said:
Please do not bring the dead of WWII into this. It is getting beyond tedious. Why is WWII always referred to when it comes to defending what soldiers are doing now?