I bet Nu Liebour do jack s**t about this...

[unsworthblue]

why are they having the enquiry into WMD? its like the steven gerrard trial and kelly inquiry.we all know the outcome.its blatantly obvious??????

 

[Stanley]

Iraq was invaded because of the belief that it possessed WMD's

Afghanistan was invaded because of its links to Al-quaeda.

You prolly do know the reasons, just don't agree with them, but that's just a whole different matter.

No, that's the reasons that we invaded those countries, not why any of that is 'protecting our freedoms'.

Many countries have terrorist organisations and nuclear weapons, yet we seem to ignore them.

Your not going to make me have to draw a line between WMD's and unhindered bases of operations and the threat to our freedoms are you?

Come on. You may, as others appear to be, thinking that by me posting the reasons that I endorse and support them, I don't. Some cretin thinks that by posting a picture of a monkey it highlights the weakness of my arguments.
I can only imagine that the learned and employed people who's job it is to try and untangle the utter cluster-f**k that is the "war on terror" is, have to be a lot of work to do and everyone on their back.

We can sit here in our man city forum and try our best to educate/convince/brainwash others as we see fit.

 

[ElanJo]

No, that's the reasons that we invaded those countries, not why any of that is 'protecting our freedoms'.

Many countries have terrorist organisations and nuclear weapons, yet we seem to ignore them.

Your not going to make me have to draw a line between WMD's and unhindered bases of operations and the threat to our freedoms are you?

Come on. You may, as others appear to be, thinking that by me posting the reasons that I endorse and support them, I don't. Some cretin thinks that by posting a picture of a monkey it highlights the weakness of my arguments.
I can only imagine that the learned and employed people who's job it is to try and untangle the utter cluster-f**k that is the "war on terror" is, have to be a lot of work to do and everyone on their back.

We can sit here in our man city forum and try our best to educate/convince/brainwash others as we see fit.

Lol, I wasn't making fun of you, Mr. Touchy. I gathered that you were being sarcastic. "Cretin"? Lighten up ffs


PS. It was an orangutan, not a monkey. ;)

 

[Damocles]

No, stating an opinion doesn't show endorsement.

The point I was trying to raise, is that we only seemed to be concerned that Iraq had WMDs, despite the evidence to the contrary, and we are less concerned that Pakistan has WMDs, for example. I don't equate somebody else having a nuclear weapon as a threat against my way of life, and if others did, then perhaps I have misjudged the situation. Many people have nuclear weapons, and we are not afraid of their countries.

Why can Iraq not have WMDs in the eyes of the West, but Israelis can?

Isn't the whole idea that only our allies can have WMDs a fundamental flaw in the logic behind the War on Terror? Surely, an even platform would be that everybody has them, or nobody has them, therefore the fear can be eradicated and nobody is in a state of 'terror'?

 

[Stanley]

No, stating an opinion doesn't show endorsement.

The point I was trying to raise, is that we only seemed to be concerned that Iraq had WMDs, despite the evidence to the contrary, and we are less concerned that Pakistan has WMDs, for example. I don't equate somebody else having a nuclear weapon as a threat against my way of life, and if others did, then perhaps I have misjudged the situation. Many people have nuclear weapons, and we are not afraid of their countries.

Why can Iraq not have WMDs in the eyes of the West, but Israelis can?

Isn't the whole idea that only our allies can have WMDs a fundamental flaw in the logic behind the War on Terror? Surely, an even platform would be that everybody has them, or nobody has them, therefore the fear can be eradicated and nobody is in a state of 'terror'?

What worries me more is how we are being lined up for Invading Iran.

 

[Damocles]

It's not really that shocking. It completes the US/British ownership of the Caspian Sea/Persian Gulf area which controls a vast amount of resources. Iran is like a big block in the middle of it whereas we control all sides of it's borders. It will eventually fall, just so that we can have the space to ourselves.

I don't really mind a resource war, in the scheme of things. I hate all wars, but at least a resource war has an actual point to it. If they gave us going into Afghanistan to control the heroin trade, and into Iraq to control the oilfields as reasons for war, I'd be pretty content.

 

[ElanJo]

Disagree with his domestic social/economic preferences all you want (I do) but I cannot see how anyone could disagree with what he says here:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbwRvzXULtg&NR=1[/youtube]

 

[Damocles]

Chomsky is an utter hero of mine!

Don't always agree with him, but love the way he explains his positions logically.

 

[Nreddishblue]

No, stating an opinion doesn't show endorsement.

The point I was trying to raise, is that we only seemed to be concerned that Iraq had WMDs, despite the evidence to the contrary, and we are less concerned that Pakistan has WMDs, for example. I don't equate somebody else having a nuclear weapon as a threat against my way of life, and if others did, then perhaps I have misjudged the situation. Many people have nuclear weapons, and we are not afraid of their countries.

Why can Iraq not have WMDs in the eyes of the West, but Israelis can?

Isn't the whole idea that only our allies can have WMDs a fundamental flaw in the logic behind the War on Terror? Surely, an even platform would be that everybody has them, or nobody has them, therefore the fear can be eradicated and nobody is in a state of 'terror'?

I don't agree with our wars in Iraq OR Afghanistan. A lot of innocent people have lost their lives. I also disagreed wholeheartedly with our actions in the former Yugoslavia as well, that set the precedent for regime change, without the flimsy "cover" of fighting for the British national interest.

As Gordon Brown said in his Guildhall speech a month or so back, what we are fighting for in these countries is the New World Order, the internationalist, global capitalist empire. We are NOT fighting for Britain.

HOWEVER. I can't stand idily by when the enemies of my people wish to disrespect our dead soldiers. I'd be very, very surprised if the police let this march go ahead.

 

[pee dubyas crayons]

Chomsky is an utter hero of mine!