Forum menu
Bombing Lybia – Who...
 

[Closed] Bombing Lybia – Who is paying for it?

Posts: 23341
Full Member
Topic starter
 
[#2583233]

If the US, France, Britain, Canada and Denmark are enforcing a UN mandate with their actions over Lybia who is paying for it? Do the UN have central funds made available to those who are acting on their behalf?

Not trolling BTW… I’d just like to know.


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 9:58 am
 ojom
Posts: 177
Free Member
 

Judging by our council tax bill i suspect it's being siphoned off the water board and put into missiles.


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 10:00 am
 j_me
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

There's a use by date on the cruise missiles and the likes. Cheaper to use them in anger than to decommission them. So in some twisted way its probably saving the MOD money. 😉


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 10:09 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Is there a use by date and a best before date?


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 10:30 am
Posts: 1972
Full Member
 

Read the title and thought it was "Bombing Labia - who pays?". Thought STW was about to continue my education in all things weird and wonderful in the sexual department 😯

I'd assumed that we end up forking out for it, but it's a good question and I'll be interested to see if anyone knows with any great degree of certainty


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 10:32 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

ditch_jockey - I suppose that to some extent sneaking in and making a mess of labia overnight is already an RAF speciality

😉

http://www.****/news/article-473525/Sexsomniac-RAF-man-sobs-cleared-raping-girl-sleep.html


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 10:48 am
Posts: 1930
Free Member
 

Judging by the state of the local roads, I suspect Salford City Council are paying for ours and Denmark's bombs and petrol.

If they were bombing Labia, wouldn't this be a middle east cunflict?


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 11:34 am
Posts: 7100
Free Member
 

From the DM article;

This defence was supported by his girlfriend, who told the court that he had fondled her in bed while asleep.

I didn't realise that was a "condition".


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 11:45 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

It doesn't have to be a condition - it's an automatism argument, not a lack of criminal responsibility argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatism_(law)


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 12:42 pm
Posts: 34533
Full Member
 

well a bit of googling tells me each tomahawk cruise missle costs between $600k and 1.2 million a pop

not sure hwo many weve fired so far but im guessing that means another 50 000 council workers need to be sacked

[url= http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/tomahawk-cruise-missiles-used-for-libya-assaultq/story-e6frfkui-1226024934986 ]http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/tomahawk-cruise-missiles-used-for-libya-assaultq/story-e6frfkui-1226024934986[/url]


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 1:01 pm
Posts: 23341
Full Member
Topic starter
 

"They're effective, they're reliable, they're safe. And they don't normally miss," retired US general Wesley Clark, a former NATO military commander, told CNN.

Safe? Rather depends on whether you are giving or receiving.

Don't normally miss! Awesome.


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 1:12 pm
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

Zulu-Eleven - have you been waiting 3.5 years to use that story or did you drag it up for another reason that I can't quite fathom?


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 1:32 pm
Posts: 20666
Full Member
 

Well if we're all linking to stories, [url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/planes-kill-baddies-201103213643/ ]this one[/url] is much more amusing.


 
Posted : 21/03/2011 1:44 pm