The Doctor Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 , , and . so you reckon the war in iraq WORKED? HAHAHAHAHA and you call me stupid! what am i dealing with here 'it did a few things wrong' ohhh please pick up a book, we tried to take over the world as much as hitler did! And got a lot closer than him. name me ONE time where we overpowered a terrorist group and it worked. If you can't, you're basing your whole argument on guesswork 'it might work' Not exactly, but we used power against the taliban and greatly reduced the hold they had over the middle-east. We used power against Al-Qaeda, and they are nowhere near as much of a threat as they used to be. As I said, the Empire was by no means perfect, but for every bad act it committed, it did something good (e.g. abolition of slavery). It wasn't however a terrorist organisation - terrorist organisations are hard to define, but they are generally organisations that commit illegal acts of war to inspire fear in the people they want to subject - that's not the empire. The empire was just an invading force.
Webbo Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQxwaVQWSbY look at this with an open mind I managed about 90 seconds before I wanted to kick the screen in. Seriously, what's his appeal? He's not funny and he talks shit. If you think he has anything worthwhile to listen to it explains a lot about you.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Not exactly, but we used power against the taliban and greatly reduced the hold they had over the middle-east. We used power against Al-Qaeda, and they are nowhere near as much of a threat as they used to be. As I said, the Empire was by no means perfect, but for every bad act it committed, it did something good (e.g. abolition of slavery). It wasn't however a terrorist organisation - terrorist organisations are hard to define, but they are generally organisations that commit illegal acts of war to inspire fear in the people they want to subject - that's not the empire. The empire was just an invading force. oh yeah the good old british well done for them for realising that working people against their will is completely wrong
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 I managed about 90 seconds before I wanted to kick the screen in. Seriously, what's his appeal? He's not funny and he talks shit. If you think he has anything worthwhile to listen to it explains a lot about you. he doesn't talk shit at all, i didn't like him before i watched his videos, as for his comedy, i agree it isnt brilliant, but he puts across a great point throughout all his videos and he exposes news outlets, america especially, to be bogus I managed about 90 seconds before I wanted to kick the screen in. Seriously, what's his appeal? He's not funny and he talks shit. If you think he has anything worthwhile to listen to it explains a lot about you. 'explains a lot about you' for all you know i could be a black gay jew, you have no idea who i am or what beliefs i have, so dont tar me with any brush.
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Russell Brand is the definition of what a thick person thinks an intelligent person is. for all you know i could be a black gay jew, you have no idea who i am or what beliefs i have, so dont tar me with any brush. You're not a black gay jew, you have spoken to a few people before on here on Twitter. https://twitter.com/sarcastic_prick- That's your account.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Russell Brand is the definition of what a thick person thinks an intelligent person is. You're not a black gay jew, you have spoken to a few people before on here on Twitter. https://twitter.com/sarcastic_prick- That's your account. but why does it matter? the fact your merely going out of your way to work out what i am proves youre bothered
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 you know me Russell Brand is the definition of what a thick person thinks an intelligent person is. You're not a black gay jew, you have spoken to a few people before on here on Twitter. https://twitter.com/sarcastic_prick- That's your account.
leicesterlad1989 Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 air strikes...if ISIS air striked england would you agree that england would have a vast amount of people join the army and want to fight? Yes. So, what I EXPECT when we bomb them, is for them locals to do the same. They're not going to look at an air strike and go 'OH NO THEY KILLED MY MOTHER BUT THEY WERE AIMING FOR THE BAD GUYS SO I GUESS THATS OKAY' theyre gonna wanna stand up against whoever done it So you said on your previous post you would like peace (and wouldn't we all) yet the IS want a worldwide caliphate as I said on my previous response. How does that encourage peace when one of what seems like many different interpretations of the Islamic faith, expects the rest of the Islamic world to obey their rules and their reign. How does beheading innocent encourage peace? These people not only kill believers of the same faith but they are killing believers of others and if they don't join them, they kill them also. If we as a country said, "enoughs enough now, we will stop the bombing and we will leave you all to it," then IS would just continue their battle to get what they want and will still be killing a hell of a lot more innocents than we ever would.
The Doctor Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 oh yeah the good old british well done for them for realising that working people against their will is completely wrong And yet the empire abolished it while others continued the practise... Also the trews is a load of crap.
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 but why does it matter? the fact your merely going out of your way to work out what i am proves youre bothered Just pointing out that you couldn't be a gay black jew. Webbo - You did better than me, 30 seconds before I had to turn it off. I have never seen what anyone sees in Russell Brand, incredible. His opinions on the elite and companies not paying tax wouldn't be so laughble if didn't sell his own book rights to Amazon to sell.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 And yet the empire abolished it while others continued the practise... Also the trews is a load of crap. okay, and okay. bombs dont work we've had them for many years, they do not solve, only create problems I see no reason why we should bomb these people, all it will do is create more terrorists, have we not learnt from ten years ago? is this not why over a million people marched against a war in iraq?
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 is this not why over a million people marched against a war in iraq? They marched because they felt the war was wrong. Why didn't a million march against this so called 'war in Iraq'?
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 They marched because they felt the war was wrong. Why didn't a million march against this so called 'war in Iraq'? because we havn't sent any troops over, it will come don't worry
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 They marched because they felt the war was wrong. Why didn't a million march against this so called 'war in Iraq'? its already started http://rt.com/uk/193216-britain-protest-isis-strikes/
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 because we havn't sent any troops over, it will come don't worry So after 4 pages of basing your whole claim that we shouldn't do anything as 'we didn't learn from last time' you now admit that the situation we are in is and action we are taking is completely different to that of ten years ago... And you are kidding yourself if you think the strength of feeling towards striking against ISIS would be similar to that of the 2003 marches, even the most anti war liberals in parliament this time realise action needs to be taken against such evil.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 So after 4 pages of basing your whole claim that we shouldn't do anything as 'we didn't learn from last time' you now admit that the situation we are in is and action we are taking is completely different to that of ten years ago... And you are kidding yourself if you think the strength of feeling towards striking against ISIS would be similar to that of the 2003 marches, even the most anti war liberals in parliament this time realise action needs to be taken against such evil. not do nothing! Just not bomb them!! and relating to your second point, then why are we doing less if more anti war liberals are for it?? doesnt add up at all
absolutelegend Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Russell Brand is the definition of what a thick person thinks an intelligent person is. You're not a black gay jew, you have spoken to a few people before on here on Twitter. https://twitter.com/sarcastic_prick- That's your account. This
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 not do nothing! Just not bomb them!! and relating to your second point, then why are we doing less if more anti war liberals are for it?? doesnt add up at all Well because despite what you seem to think we don't actually want to go to war again. We're hoping the airstrikes will be sufficient enough to de stabilise ISIS enough that the NDF, Hezbollah, Peshmerga and Iraqi army can do the job for us. We're not actually looking to take over a nation state here or enforce regime change, it's to defeat a rebel group in a civil war that is widely regarded by pretty much the whole World as completely evil and something that quite simply has to be stopped before it can gain access to any real sort of power or even worse nuclear war weapons.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 bollocks, they know it won't work, i can guarentee you ground forces will be deployed
Guest MattP Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 bollocks, they know it won't work, i can guarentee you ground forces will be deployed Not happening, for a start the Syrian regime would never let us put troops on the ground while Assad is there. Heard it all before though from people who produce arguments like you do, remember the 'I guarantee you Iran is next' argument from the same people about 7-8 years back, the ones who can't actually see the wider picture and instead just want to blame the West for everything.
JmorsonLCFC Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Not happening, for a start the Syrian regime would never let us put troops on the ground while Assad is there. Heard it all before though from people who produce arguments like you do, remember the 'I guarantee you Iran is next' argument from the same people about 7-8 years back, the ones who can't actually see the wider picture and instead just want to blame the West for everything. Just name me one time where violence has worked against terrorists
MPH Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 not do nothing! Just not bomb them!! and relating to your second point, then why are we doing less if more anti war liberals are for it?? doesnt add up at all So we should put troops on the ground then? If not, what DO you think we should do? Just name me one time where violence has worked against terrorists You sound french
MC Prussian Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 Just name me one time where violence has worked against terrorists When's the last time talks or doing nothing helped against terrorists?
absolutelegend Posted 22 October 2014 Posted 22 October 2014 So we should put troops on the ground then? If not, what DO you think we should do? You sound french Was just thinking the same. I'd like to know what his better alternative to the current approach is.Its always easy to be the critic.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.