Screw Tony Blair And War on Terror

[Gilgamesh]

Sorry, ill write more from now on, i dont really know the rules much, since i just joined, ill look em up.

[Timber Loftis]

Well, you made it to 100 posts on this thread, I'll note.

Do yourself a favor and read the Rules very very soon. They're there for a reason.

[khazadman]

Well Donut, of course we wanted payment for what we were giving. We were just coming out of a depression, so giving away all that materiel would have sent us back into one. And another point is that we were in the war before 12-07-41. Our navy was escorting convoys and hunting u-boats. Same for the Army Air Corps and Coast Guard.

[Attalus]

Not only that, Khazadman, but FDR faced considerable domestic opposition from isolationists, which, I regret to say, were Republican, and he had to show at least something for the aircraft, ships, and supplies that he was sending to the Brits. Strange turn of events. Now the Democrats are the ones screaming about sending troops abroad.

[Davros]

Good post Donut - taught me a thing or two - nice to see you around, we must talk cricket sometime .

LOL at the armed whack a mole and the spelling corrections.

[Lanesra]

Originally posted by Gilgamesh: Hmmm, This seems to be quite the conversation ive started.... But im still thinking... I aint worried bout War any more, I still think tony blair is a fool though. A lying fool... He cant keep his promises, i really dont aproove oh him...

I think he should spend more on education.

[Davros]

Originally posted by Lanesra: quote: Originally posted by Gilgamesh: Hmmm, This seems to be quite the conversation ive started.... But im still thinking... I aint worried bout War any more, I still think tony blair is a fool though. A lying fool... He cant keep his promises, i really dont aproove oh him...

I think he should spend more on education.[/QUOTE]I would have to second that call

[Gregster]

Originally posted by Morgeruat: about the remark about the US being weak because we're going to the UN for help in the war on terror, the war on terror affects the entire world, it's only right to ask everyone to help.

I would counter that by saying that seeking UN approval to defend ourselves and our sovereign right as a nation state to live reasonably free of terror is not weak, it's just plain pointless and stupid. The UN is a decison-making committee, and anyone who's done anything through a committee knows that comittees stink. We have loads of committees in Washington to address things like poverty, homelesness, the sorry state of rural and inner-city school, pollution, and drug abuse...and we all know how well those committees work. Hell, technically, going out on a date is a committee-- a committee of two people. Yet this committee can spend hours in tortured debate over whether to go out for Italian or Chinese and whether to see an action movie or a chick flick afterwards...usually was both parties winding up unhappy.

World terrorism is, of course, a world-wide problem. And most certainly, spirited cooperation between nations would make the task easier and strengthen diplomatic ties (shared hardship is the best way to build a friendship). But I do not think the US should try and make everyone happy at the expense of our security-- Bill Clinton did that for 8 years, and the same people that are supposed to be pissed at us for acting unilaterally (the Arabs, the Chinese, the French, and the Russians) were pissed at us when we were kissing major butt.

Originally posted by Morgeruat: about asking the UN for help with Iraq specifically, that's good politics

No, it's yet another colossally bad idea. HOw are they gonna help? THe last time a Bush was in office he asked for their help with Iraq and wound up doing all the work himself anyway. Hell, if it was up to the UN, the Kuwaitis would be speaking Arabic...okay, bad example, but I think you know what I mean. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Then they passed a resolution that was supposed to fix Saddam's wagon and make sure he couldn't terrorize the region...and we all know how well that worked. After months of political wire-pulling and gamesmanship, the only damn thing the UN has done of note is pass yet another resolution stating that enforcing the first resolution would be a good idea.

And I won't even spend the time cataloguing the way the UN has made a goat-screw out of most of the other problems they were supposed to "fix."

Originally posted by Morgeruat: it's much better to ask for approval (something the US tends not to do more than we should) than to go off and do our thing (something the international arena screams at us unceasingly for

Actually, it's much easier to get forgiveness than approval. And the rest of the world can, as far as I'm concerned, pipe down about what we're supposed to do. "THe rest of the world" does not want us aggresively defending ourselves from terrorist...oh, by they're all too happy to pontificate to America about its solemn duty as a world power to "be a leader" and solve everyone ELSES problems. Such as browbeating us into fiascos like the relief mission in Somalia or dragging us kicking and screaming into Kosovo. Some in the global leaderhsip community have been making noise about how it's the job of the US to solve the Arab/Isreali problem up to and including deploying troops to keep them apart...and we all know how much Arabs love it when US troops deploy on their turf. Almost as much as the fiercely proud and protective Isrealis would enjoy US troops barging in, setting up camp, and telling them their business.

ALong this same line, I've really just about had it hearing about how "the Arab world" is going to rise up in unison and clobber the US if we invade Iraq. You may remember how the Arab world rose up and clobbered us the LAST time we invaded Iraq (which many said would happen). It was almost as bad as when they rose up in unison and clobbered up for invading Afghanistan and bombing Libya like many "experts" swore would happen...the same "experts" who said that the war with Iraq in '91 and the invasion of Afghanistan in '01 would surely result in long, bloody, protracted military and political quagmires (the "Another Vietname" Syndrome). I think it's safe to say that the experts are full of it.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Grungi: ...{snip}... as for religion thats just a word to describe a faith and im not picking on any, rather on all, i think all religion is based generally on the same precepts anyway and its not for me BUT i think religion itself does good things but the people who follow it rarely get it right and of course its hard because were only human and to ask for perfection (afterlife normally) from humans is an impossiblity so to even try and attain which most religions do is asking alot, but religion has caused hurt and suffering the world over, organised religion i have a problem with, IMO religion is a private thing, sharing it is good only if other people are receptive to it, everyone needs something to believe in so cant argue with that i spose, just not for me at all as i can pick so many holes in religious arguments anytime someone tries to convert me that they end up wondering if their religion is right [img]tongue.gif[/img] ...{snip}...

{hehe} Anytime you would like to see those holes "plugged up", I'll be happy to oblige, Grungi [img]graemlins/biglaugh.gif[/img]

[Davros]

Originally posted by Gregster: Actually, it's much easier to get forgiveness than approval.

Well here's a gem I totally agree with. It's the same at work - it is much easier to lose production and fix a problem and be forgiven for the decision than it is to convince people to approve the shutdown to fix the problem.

On the body of your post, I agree with the points you make about the effectiveness of the UN, and the accuracy of the so called experts - in fact almost general approval on content.

The manner in which the latter sections were said though, comes across as "we are the biggest bully in the streets and if we want your lunch money we will bloody well take it". Now of course that is not a very successful the way to win friends and influence people, but you seem to argue that that in itself is really immaterial. One thing that manner does do is it keeps the word TARGET painted squarely on the chest of the country.

The US is big enough to go it alone, but I would have thought there still were advantages to not alienating all your friends in the world. If the US were only into bully action on their own, then I would struggle with my personal position of wholehearted support.