 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elden
Such as forcing Australia to make up the numbers... |
That would be impossible - Not enough population.
However, would you consider having some of our tactical nukes?
|
|
| |
|
|
spartak
|
|
I was watching this in the news yesterday
Sky (Right wingish)
ITN (Right wingish)
BBC (More or less centre)
and all 3 had the same lead, that Rummy had goofed and had really offended the UK and embaressed and undermined Blair.
Sky's Adam Boulton described a "firestorm of protest from Number 10" directed at Rummy after his remarks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Where's the difference?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Ah, entertainment value...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"to the enforcement of it's own d@mned resolution"
You really believe that is the issue?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:26
|
|
That's part of the issue, yes. It absolutely is, whether you care to acknowledge it or not.
"serious consequences" means just exactly that. Serious. Consequential. Force was not specifically called for, but NO ONE discounted the use of it....after all, with sanctions and no fly zones in place already, there weren't any other "serious" or "consequential"
cards to play, now were there?
We have been d*cking around with Saddam for almost twice as long a time now, as US soldiers spent fighting WWI, WWII, and Korea COMBINED (counting from Saddam's FIRST UN violation).
Enough is enough.
If the UN lacks the balls to enforce its own resolution then perhaps (just perhaps, mind you), it should get out of the business of writing them. In any case, they have certainly proved their own uselessness, and we will enforce the resolution on its behalf, whether it likes it or not.
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MOBIUS
|
 |
Prifysgol Caerdydd
Dec 1999
time: 15:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Velociryx
That's part of the issue, yes. It absolutely is, whether you care to acknowledge it or not.
"serious consequences" means just exactly that. Serious. Consequential. Force was not specifically called for, but NO ONE discounted the use of it....after all, with sanctions and no fly zones in place already, there weren't any other "serious" or "consequential"
cards to play, now were there? |
Why not say 'War' then?
To me 'serious consequences' means things like tougher sanctions, regularly bombing the crap out of Iraqi installations (which is already happening every other day on average!) etc. It is NOT war...
quote:
We have been d*cking around with Saddam for almost twice as long a time now, as US soldiers spent fighting WWI, WWII, and Korea COMBINED (counting from Saddam's FIRST UN violation). |
 Yes, but still less time than France and the UK fought in those wars - where were you guys when we were fighting Hitler?
Not forgetting those 4 years when the US pulled out the weapons inspectors...
Which is why we don't want a war of first resort! Did you know that Iraq's two biggest opposition parties are opposed to a war...?
quote:
If the UN lacks the balls to enforce its own resolution then perhaps (just perhaps, mind you), it should get out of the business of writing them. In any case, they have certainly proved their own uselessness, and we will enforce the resolution on its behalf, whether it likes it or not.
|
Bollocks! 'Serious Consequencies' does not a war make!
If you get the second resolution, by all means consider it a green light in getting thousands of civilians killed...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:26
|
|
Why not say war? Because the UNSC hasn't got the nads to use such harsh language. The USA has been paying to keep Saddam "contained" and as long as we're the ones doing the flying and footing the bill, it should be up to us when we say enough is enough. Since it's our boys on the front line, and our money paying to keep him in check, if we feel it's time to pull the plug and do something stronger, then that is something we do not need anybody's permission on. I have seen NO evidence of any other nation, or collection of nations stepping up to help. Nada.
Tougher sanctions? France and Germany have been ignoring them anyway! What....do you think Saddam and his cronies MADE THEIR OWN drone? Made their own Smallpox virus? Nahhh, they bought them from our "allies" who short circuited the whole idea behind sanctions, and only now, when we're pushing for something decisive, do they fall back to the old sanctions line, bemoaning the fact that we just haven't given it enough time.
Uh huh.
I'm quite sure that France and Germany would much rather see Uncle Sam foot the bill for Saddam's containment till he grows old and dies....that way, nothing is required of either country.
But that's not what we're going to do, nor is it up for discussion, any moreso than the USA has any say over France's budgetary process.
At the core of it, is this. Saddam is a little terror of our own creation. We regard him as a threat, and plan to remove that threat. Our allies, AS allies, should not raise such a stink over what is essentially the US taking out its own garbage.
That France and Germany ARE, however....that they are actively drumming up support against it, speaks directly to something important.
How much of an ally are they, really?
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:26
|
|
quote:
How long did France fight the nazis? |
Hmm.. if I remember correctly, longer than the Poles, Serbs, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Greeks, Norwegians, and certainly longer than those like the Slovaks, Croats, Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, and Italians who backed the Nazi's (of course that is no black mark as long as they support the war), or the Spaniards who took their aid but never got involved (also not a black mark on them, of course). Oh, and lets not forget the strong resistance the US put up against Nazi Germany before Dec 9, 1941: we really wanted to go towar before we actually went to war when they declared it on us... we really, really did.
That is, of course, if one ignores the actions of resistance figthers from any of the conqured nations, and the expatirates who fought bravely alongside Allied forces in Europe.
Yes, of course we must alway ridicuale the Vichy French government for its actions: it is utterly hypocritcal though to ignore the complicty of most of our European backers had with the Nazis as well.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-03-2003 18:47
|