Who are you going to vote for? - 100 days to go.

Blackhand wrote:First Post here, was going to use it to introduce myself but instead I have to use it say that joke made me giggle for far longer than it should have:lol:

Welcome to the nuthouse

Welcome aboard blackhand. Was it an Arctic expedition?

Welcome Blackhand. I'll get back to you after my bed bath.

boltonbonce wrote:Welcome Blackhand. I'll get back to you after my bed bath.

I'm on my way. Give me ten minutes

thank you for the lovely warm welcome! and now to throw the cat among the pigeons! Im voting UKIP, I'm also in the Forces so I can't really have a say on unjust wars, but there's a couple of things I will say, i genuinely fear for my job if the conservatives remain in power after the GE. My department is at 40% manning and still savings are trying to be made. I also genuinely worry for the security of the country if immigration is not capped/curbed, and for these reasons theres only UKIP who I honestly feel are willing to grip these issues... and COMMENCE! 

y2johnny wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:Welcome Blackhand. I'll get back to you after my bed bath.

I'm on my way. Give me ten minutes

My nurse can cope very well on her own thanks. Sort Blackhand out with an Ultras uniform,he sounds prime material if he can pass the Brucie test.

bwfc1874 wrote:I'm talking about the UK Okocha I don't know enough about foreign politics to comment, I'd guess they all fed the WMD nonsense to their respective parliaments though. Are you a supporter of the war?

But that's the point: you would be guessing. 
In total, 40 countries were involved in the Iraq War; the coalition mission was  to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.
39 countries other than our own believed that action was necessary, yet it seems to be mainly our leader who is taking the flak from civilians  who know nothing of the fine detail and rationale for the invasion.
 If intelligence agencies report to their government their findings about a country's suffering under an unbalanced, dangerous leader who is torturing and slaughtering his own people, and represents a serious threat to other countries too, are we expecting each respective prime minister or president to ignore the facts as presented to them?
I saw an Iraqi woman on British TV report how, under Saddam, she and fellow villagers were forced to watch and applaud as their menfolk were herded into a field, tortured and murdered before their eyes. Do we stand by and do nothing as was the case in Rwanda for example? What would you do? It's easy to criticise after the event, but remember that military action was approved by all the main political parties in this country and by 39 other countries too.The attorney general has stated that the war was legal, yet many of the ignorant rank and file in this country think they know better.
 As Blair has said so often, all you can do is act on the intelligence given and follow your conscience, which in Blair's case, was strongly formed and shaped by his religious faith. 

I can't quite believe that last sentence. Do you think relgion should play a part in invading a country?

As for the rest, I'm not sure where you've copy and pasted it from but everybody knows how much of a nut Sadam Hussain was, but it's irrelevant. its well established that we invaded to support the U.S. who were motivated by Iraqs lack of support in the war of terror. When Sadam refused to back the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan Bush decided to finish the job his father started. 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead and what have we achieved?

bwfc1874 wrote:I can't quite believe that last sentence. Do you think relgion should play a part in invading a country?

As for the rest, I'm not sure where you've copy and pasted it from but everybody knows how much of a nut Sadam Hussain was, but it's irrelevant. its well established that we invaded to support the U.S. who were motivated by Iraqs lack of support in the war of terror. When Sadam refused to back the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan Bush decided to finish the job his father started. 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead and what have we achieved?

No, if you read what I wrote more carefully, you will see that I said that the decision was made on the basis of the intelligence provided and of his conscience. I'd be guessing as regards the precise reasoning of the other 39 countries, as you would be.

I agree with you that, whilst the original objectives were achieved, the lack of planning for managing the aftermath was a shambles.

PS The only part that was copied and pasted was the statement of the exact aims of the coalition forces which takes up one line at the start of the piece.

okocha wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:I'm talking about the UK Okocha I don't know enough about foreign politics to comment, I'd guess they all fed the WMD nonsense to their respective parliaments though. Are you a supporter of the war?

But that's the point: you would be guessing. 
In total, 40 countries were involved in the Iraq War; the coalition mission was  to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.
39 countries other than our own believed that action was necessary, yet it seems to be mainly our leader who is taking the flak from civilians  who know nothing of the fine detail and rationale for the invasion.
 If intelligence agencies report to their government their findings about a country's suffering under an unbalanced, dangerous leader who is torturing and slaughtering his own people, and represents a serious threat to other countries too, are we expecting each respective prime minister or president to ignore the facts as presented to them?
I saw an Iraqi woman on British TV report how, under Saddam, she and fellow villagers were forced to watch and applaud as their menfolk were herded into a field, tortured and murdered before their eyes. Do we stand by and do nothing as was the case in Rwanda for example? What would you do? It's easy to criticise after the event, but remember that military action was approved by all the main political parties in this country and by 39 other countries too.The attorney general has stated that the war was legal, yet many of the ignorant rank and file in this country think they know better.
 As Blair has said so often, all you can do is act on the intelligence given and follow your conscience, which in Blair's case, was strongly formed and shaped by his religious faith. 

Okocha makes some very interesting points, however... with the benefit of hindsight, I suspect that the West must rue the day that they voted to oust Saddam from Iraq. Likewise Gadaffi in Libya. Assad is reputed to be a brutal dictator in Syria but surely he is the lesser of two evils when compared to ISIS?

The simple truth is that the majority of folk in the UK have no real understanding of the political situation in the middle east and are saddened at the loss of life of British troops in some fly infested shithole in the back end of beyond simply because the politicians say so. It's time for the UK to stop pretending we are major players on the world stage and stop wasting money on lengthy campaigns in some camel infested desert in the interest of global peace. We are not fcuking sheriffs and we cannot afford to keep wasting millions and millions of pounds on foreign crusades in the name of freedom. You can bet your bottom dollar that the next few years are going to be littered with atrocities and carnage in our own back yard, all in the name of religion. At a time when the government are thinning the military services and police forces to the bare bones to reduce the deficit, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism is on the increase. Something doesn't add up.

Oh.. and by the way.. when the wheel comes off.. and it all turns to ratshit... the government of the day will have to find a scapegoat.... Step forward Mr Kelly. You were the UK expert on WMD and since Saddam had none, you will be a convenient scapegoat.

boltonbonce wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:Welcome Blackhand. I'll get back to you after my bed bath.

I'm on my way. Give me ten minutes

My nurse can cope very well on her own thanks. Sort Blackhand out with an Ultras uniform,he sounds prime material if he can pass the Brucie test.

Why do you keep confusing me for scott. Carry on and your going on a home dad. ......i mean bonce

Who are you people and why are you in my garden?

only 3 votes for the Conservatives, what a fecking disgrace.

boltonbonce wrote:Who are you people and why are you in my garden?

dad leave the garden gnomes alone

Mr Magoo wrote:only 3 votes for the Conservatives, what a fecking disgrace.

4 too many

y2johnny wrote:

Mr Magoo wrote:only 3 votes for the Conservatives, what a fecking disgrace.

4 too many

Now you know how Brucie felt. Beaten by a bunch of tossers.
Not only that,someone withdrew their pro Brucie vote!
Magoo or KP? 
I'll find out,mark my words.

Who let Magoo vote 3 times for conservative????

Mr Magoo wrote:only 3 votes for the Conservatives, what a fecking disgrace.

Is it any wonder

Ive read about that before.  Arent they supposed to employ them after so long but always find reaso s to get rid and instead get another new "freebie" worker