I think Shaid is talking a lot of sense in this thread.

 

Martin, you are talking like a politician. Remember how Helmand was going to be sorted without a single shot being fired according to the government!!!

 

If that was ever said (which it wasn't) then you might have a point.

We all have a clear picture of what you're against, but what would you do in this situation?

 

And so it begins. Rather than this being what it is, a response to a monstrous act that we've been dragged into kicking and screaming. Instead it can all be explained by a daft conspriacy theory...obvioulsy


Who's going to be the first muppet to scream 'it's all about oil'?

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/h...ade-in-helmand

"Famously, during a visit to Afghanistan in April 2006, the then Defence Secretary, John Reid, said:

We’re in the south to help and protect the Afghan people to reconstruct their economy and democracy. We would be perfectly happy to leave again in three years’ time without firing one shot.

Many misinterpreted this as meaning there was an expectation, or hope, that we would leave without having fired a shot. In fact, the quote had been intended to reinforce the position that the UK troops’ goal was to protect governance and development activities as opposed to taking deliberate kinetic actions."

 

The most exasperating aspect of this debate is that the very people who accuse the government of spinning and telling half-truths are perfectly happy to spin and tell half-truth that justify their position, I believe it's called hypocrisy?

Oh and apparently I'm the one 'talking like a politician'!!

 

Oil has played a central role in the US foreign policy in the middle east for decades

Only an idiot would deny that

Just recently the CIA have admitted they overthrew the democratic government of Iran in the 50's to secure the Iranian oil supplies (after they had been nationalised)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23762970

 

Hi Obama, look mate we're nearly bankrupt as a nation and Hollande is chomping at the bit so suggest you buddy up with him on this one as like they say on the den ... we're out

There are many more countries where atrocities of varying levels against those countries' people happen every day.... yet we seem to pck and choose whichever 'crusade' best suits us!

 

Indeed oil and national security go hand in hand.

But that's not the point here is it?

the 'it's all about oil' brigade are serial conspriacy theorist with no evidence whatsoever. And even when the facts play out they still won't admit they were wrong

 

That's a morally and intellectually vacuous argument

We've spent 3 years trying not to get involved in this 'crusade' a fact you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge

 

Er... it was clearly said! BTW 4 million bullets a year are being fired in Helmand!

However just to humour you.... given that the WMD crap spouted by Blair and co. was later proved to be a lie that most of them knew to be a lie (Blair insists he didn't but who the f**k can believe anything he says?) one can only assume they had another motive for invading Iraq which we have never been told about hence why do you think people trust the governement as about as far as they can throw them or are you denying this happened as well?

How about 'misson creep' in Libya.... we're protecting civilians said Cameron the Clown... oh dear we have accidentally hunted down and killed Gadaffi

 

IT WASN'T SAID. IT'S LIE AND YOU JUST PERPETUATED IT AGAIN!!!

If Iraq was about oil, then where the hell is it? Why I am paying £1.40 a litre. Oh, because it wasn't of course. BTW who buys the majority of the Iraqi oil we 'liberated' or stole ??....China!!


Did we kill Ghadaffi???
If we did then good, but I'm pretty sure he was last seen alive being driven off but his fellow countrymen

 

Nope it's one you can't understand as only three people on this board seem to get how much f**king debt we are in. There is no money to go to war. Morals dont come into it. Oh and I don't think you are in any position to call somone intellectually vacuous given the nonense you peddle on here these days!

Aside from that as usual there is end game, no 'misson', it's just the usual 'we must get involved' with no one actually stipping to wonder what the f**k will happen when the shooting stops (AGAIN)!

 

It's there in black and white, hodgy just quoted it. Are you blind as well as f**king annoying?

So I ask again, what was it about?

 

Hodgy's quoted John Reid exactly. Your statement was the spun, half-truth version.


Let's not go there on Iraq, you are off the charts on this discussion, there'd no point in getting into that one

 

So where is the tipping point??

At what stage does the burden of our debt get out weighed by the burden of our conscience or morality?

What kind of atrocity need to be carried out before we do something?

There must be a point that even you would abandom selfishness and decide something must be done? What would it take, I'd love to know?

 

It's not hard to manipulate the press into a lather about violence overseas in one nation, get the public behind a crusade then batter them.

Meanwhile other nations get away with atrocities because they fall under the radar of interest for the US.

We "helped" in Iraq - it backfired, we "helped" in Afghanistan - we're stuck there and haven't improved the place one bit, we will "help" in Syria and became a hated nation to even more Arabic states. There is a point where we need to LEARN, look inwards, realise we can't even afford our own hospitals and schools let alone the enormous financial and moral cost of "war" and let others deal with it. We're a tiny nation with ailing power - why the hell do we get involved in every country the US wants to manipulate (i.e. "save" it then install a puppet government).

 

All very interesting, but you just like F1 are ignoring the facts.

We have spent 3 years doing nothing, desparately avoiding getting invloved, we've sat on our hands whilst children have been executed, whist millions of refugees have been created, over 100k people have died, and whist chemical weapons have been released. To say that we are trying to create a crisis is just so opposite to what has happened, it is an argument that has zero credibility.

This is the very last thing the west wants, but there is a point at which you have to get off you hands and do something. Many believe that that point has now been reached.

 

EFA

Truly pathetic response btw!

 

Martin, what bit of we have no money to go to war are you missing? I really cannot make it plainer than that!

 

OK YouGov poll released tonight shows that 25% of the public support military intervention of any sort by the UK and 51% oppose it.

So if Cameron's tinpot coalition are really the representatives of the people like they tell us he needs to forget about being a hero and earning himself another term Falklands style and stay out of it!

 

The more your BS get exposed, the more you lose the argument, the more you need to insult and do the juvenile 'EFA' playgound trick!!

You have absolutely nothing to offer here, your argument is incoherent, and morally bankrupt. Come back when you have thought the issue through for once.

 

What bit of 'this has got nothing to do with money' don't you understand?

So there is no point at which you would support an intervention?

No point at all???

 

Just shut up whining and answer the Iraq question .... it's not hard... you reckon you have THE answer to everything else so let's hear it!!!

 

We elect governments to take tough decisions. This is a tough decision

 

War costs money does it not? Therefore this has eveything to do with money.

What about the other nations of the world getting involved?

What about all the other countires commiting atrocities?

You just pick and choose what you want to address to suit your agenda here!

Anyway it's irrelevant as the British public don't want us in there and that should be that!

 

Yep thought you'd say that... you really have missed your vocation! You'd suit the job of politician perfectly.

Now your answer leads me nicely on the Cameron's Euro Referendum bribe... if he won't conduct the will of the people here why will he do so in the referendum on Europe? Not that it will ever happen of course, buit hypothetically speaking!

 

There wasn't an Iraq question, there was your usual rant in which you made the usual unproven claims (even though you used the word 'proven' in the statement)

The Iraq war was never about oil, it was about post 9-11 security, you know that, I know that. The fact that we fukked it up was due to a criminal disregard for the post war situation.

The has been a very long enquiry looking into all the 'proven lies' on WMD, let's wait and see what the result of that was.

 

Martin, I never said it was about oil. All I said was it was not about WMD so therefore asked what was it about? The point I am making is you seem unable to comprehend why people feel they can't trust the government over the reason for intervening in Syria and I am illustraing why they feel like that!

 

I think both F1 and Martin are going to be disappointed with the actual outcome of any deliberations over taking action this week. Based on Obama's past form, the odds of him sending troops in on the ground are next to zero, and the odds of Cameron doing so if the US doesn't are around the same. The most we'll actually end up with in the immediate future is something like the air-strikes against Belgrade under Clinton, or more recently Lybia, but on a far smaller scale.

It won't be enough to get rid of Assad, or completely stop him from carrying on what he's doing, but at $750K a pop those missiles don't come cheap either.