Forum menu
[img] 
[/img]
They should pinch his bike, [u]nowt[/u] is worse than having your bike pinched!
[img] 
[/img]
Edited
Cannondale the bike of choice for tyrannical purveyors of injustice.
Actually maybe he stole it
gordimhor - Member
Cannondale the bike of choice for tyrannical purveyors of injustice
not necessarily
[img] 
[/img]
is that a trek that putins riding?
[img] 
[/img]
Lets create more people who hate/want to bring terror to the UK?
I notice that, following their (partially) successful African adventure, the French are now enthusiastically rattling sabres along with the best of them.
Allons enfants de la Patrie,
Le jour de gloire est arrivé !
Wonder what cmd would ride ...my money's not on a Boris bike.
In fact my money is on a tag along with Obama .
I'm with Vickypea and Ransos. I'd like a proper answer to why it's ok to kill people with, say drones, but not ok to kill people with sarin gas?
No, this is just a trumped-up excuse for war. Just like Iraq was. A tissue of lies. There's something else underlying it, the real reason is probably financial.
Oh, and I bloody well hate that smarmy twunt ****ing Tony ****ing Blair too. Slimy, mealy-mouthed, lying media-whore.
Don't hold back, Karin. Let it all out. 😀
I'm with Vickypea and Ransos. I'd like a proper answer to why it's ok to kill people with, say drones, but not ok to kill people with sarin gas?
Churchill held the same opinion. He was all for gassing the Germans.
I think youll find churchill gassed iraqi kurds too
As for why chemicals are a 'red line'?
according to the UN.....
100 000+ alleged deaths so far in 2.5yrs
and estimated 500-1300 in the chemical attack - thats 5-10% of all casualties in a single day and at least 100 of those children
I suppose that a gas is able to spread farther and therefore increase the risk of civillian casualties??
Im not sure thats any sort of justification for an retalliation and after all you wouldnt want to actually hit any chemical stockpiles
So using the forum as a snapshot of society most people don't want another war.
Can someone call up The Dear Leader (one paper today called him "Heir to Blair" can he sue?)and say not to worry and leave it to the Yanks.
I assume Honduras aren't really that bothered and its as irrelevant to them as it is to us.
I think whats amazing is how easily clegg has dropped his party's traditional anti-war stance
and bizarely its labour who are apparently insisting that the government get a UN mandate?
Somewhere in Afghan, earlier.
"right lads, do you want the good news first or the bad news"
"Good news please Sarge"
"Pack your bags we're leaving"
Interesting....
Not sure how much credence to give it but it seems the Mail story was genuine, and quickly pulled.
[img] 
[/img]
I suppose that a gas is able to spread farther and therefore increase the risk of civillian casualties??
Indeed. The nerve gas attack happened a couple of miles or so from the centre of Damascus.
As this map shows :
[img] 
[/img]
Staying in a hotel in the centre of Damascus was the recently arrived 20 strong team of UN chemical weapons inspectors. The day of the attack was apparently quite a windy day in Damascus.
Perhaps the Syrian regime were trying to gas the UN inspectors ? !!
And possibly themselves !!
according to the UN.....
100 000+ alleged deaths so far in 2.5yrsand estimated 500-1300 in the chemical attack - thats 5-10% of all casualties in a single day and at least 100 of those children
Pardon? My maths is awful, but doesn't that require an extra digit somewhere?
Pardon? My maths is awful, but doesn't that require an extra digit somewhere?
nope youre right its my maths thats bad!
Surely we need to leave it to their neighbours to step in and resolve this? I know the UN can be a toothless organisation at best but there comes a time when we need to not follow the US in being self appointed guardians of world civilisation (or something like that as our track record isn't very good....).
6 Typhoons en route to Cyprus to "protect our assets".
And so it begins...
Surely we need to leave it to their neighbours to step in and resolve this?
Well Saudi Arabia and Qatar are arming the rebels, Iran is backing the Syrian government, and Lebanese militias are actively fighting in Syria. You could say that their neighbours are already actively involved. And the conflict has now started to spill into Lebanon, there's very good reasons for believing that it could have far reaching consequences throughout the region, these type of conflicts usually do.
I think Ed Milliband has upset some people at Tory central office.........
The Government could not contain its fury. “No 10 and the Foreign Office think Miliband is a f*** c and a copper-bottomed s***. The French hate him now and he’s got no chance of building an alliance with the US Democratic Party,” said one Government source.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3854838.ece
think Miliband is a f*** c and a copper-bottomed s***
Whilst I actually laughed, is this really how we expect our political elite to behave?
I'm quite happy with milibastard today, not just for stopping the govt making a grave error, but also for unfuriating some ****ers.
Yes, but it's all just posturing and choreography, as is this so-called 'debate' today. Regardles of the outcvome of any vote, he UK has committed itself to hanging on to Obama's shirt tails.
[quote=ohnohesback ]Yes, but it's all just posturing and choreography, as is this so-called 'debate' today. Regardles of the outcvome of any vote, he UK has committed itself to hanging on to Obama's shirt tails.
We have to. Up at Rosyth there's a big boat being built and another to follow, plus we're committed to several billions of pounds of fancy aeroplanes. If we scaled back UK military involvement around the world to stuff we [i]should[/i] be doing there wouldn't be enough sailors and pilots around by the time they are ready.
plus we're committed to several billions of pounds of fancy aeroplanes
Worse, we're spending billions of pounds on fancy aeroplanes that don't appear to work particularly well
Personally, I'd take every single man jack out of the middle east.
Take all of the money (every single pence/cent) spent by the allied forces on the various ME wars and invest it in finding a viable alternative to oil. The middle east would be poorer, but much safer. They can then get on with whatever they want to do. We'd have a cleaner planet and (hopefully) cheaper fuel.
Wrecker....spot on.
Now there's a sensible idea!
I like it wrecker. Unfortunately it wouldn't get off the ground as it would not allow 2nd rate wannabes like Tony B. Liar, CMD, William Vague and Nick "Bastard!" Clegg to preen and posture, showing what big important men they are. It would however give Ed "Splinter Arse" Millibland something else to fence sit about.
Nice idea though and a vote winner for me.
It's a pipedream. Never happen; the oil boys have too much power.
Plenty more ideas where that came from!
Military should be used to protect the planet (with a no f***ing about policy); Shoot dickheads chopping down rainforest, sink whalers, kill rhino/elephant poachers etc. Like greenpeace but with fast air. The brains could then set about ending famine (even with some GM if necessary) using the military to effect it.
think Miliband is a f*** c and a copper-bottomed s***.
Very Malcolm Tucker
Like greenpeace but with fast air.
Nice idea.
Lets give the whale hunter guys Nimitz class carriers and take it from there
Yep, I reckon the Nishin Maru might just lose if it tried to ram SSS Nimitz!
[url= http://www.theonion.com/articles/so-whats-it-going-to-be,33662/ ]so what's it going to be ?[/url]
The government has released a statement saying that Assad dunnit
except they havent actually shown any evidence
not even a dodgy dossier
how are MPs supposed to vote on war based on no evidence??
here it is......
We have assessed previously that the Syrian regime used lethal CW on 14 occasions from 2012. This judgement was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review by the Joint Intelligence Organisation of intelligence reports plus diplomatic and open sources. We think that there have been other attacks although we do not have the same degree of confidence in the evidence. A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established.Unlike previous attacks, the degree of open source reporting of CW use on 21 August has been considerable. As a result, there is little serious dispute that chemical attacks causing mass casualties on a larger scale than hitherto (including, we judge, at least 350 fatalities) took place.
It is being claimed, including by the regime, that the attacks were either faked or undertaken by the Syrian Armed Opposition. We have tested this assertion using a wide range of intelligence and open sources, and invited HMG and outside experts to help us establish whether such a thing is possible. There is no credible intelligence or other evidence to substantiate the claims or the possession of CW by the opposition. The JIC has therefore concluded that there are no plausible alternative scenarios to regime responsibility.
Interesting article here......
This [i]judgement[/i]....we [i]think[/i]....a [i]clear pattern[/i]...has been [i]established[/i]....
Spot then deliberate mistake?!?
It really amounts to nothing more than strong circumstantial evidence.
It could be summarized as "Government forces have CWs, there is no evidence rebels have CWs. Only rebels and civilians died in the attack therefore it was very likely carried out by Govermnent forces"
While I can't deny the logic, if this is all the evidence I would say it falls short of the burden of proof required for unilateral military action
Much as I like wreckers idea, I think the option of nuking the entire region is infinitely preferable. I can't see why anyone outside Israel isn't pushing for it. The options only on the table for a couple of years, til Iran gets its grown up toys. Might as well get on with it now.
As for Millibean: I can presuming the conversation in the office went something like:
"What's Tony said on the subject? Riiiiight...... Right.... Ok...... Can someone draft mr a speech saying the exact opposite of that?"
So why is Cameron so determined to involve us in this war?
when is the next election?
Dear god! I've heard primary school children with more authority than Ed Milliband! Listening him stuttering about going to war is absolutely ridiculous! It's like listening to a 6 year old justifying his position.
Kryton57 - MemberSo why is Cameron so determined to involve us in this war?
Because every PM in office has been involved in some sort of war directly or indirectly.
If Cameron wants to maintain his profile he too must have his "winning" war(s) otherwise history will judge him as the weakest of all PMs. Which means no book publication, signing or speech giving and leading to future mega income obsolete.
🙄
"So why is Cameron so determined to involve us in this war?"
Well, recently, when he's woken up in the morning, his 'glory' isn't what it used to be... it's his age you understand; the changes that happen to all men of a certain age... in fact Sam Cam has been feeling quite let down and unsatisfied about it all. Making disabled people homeless no longer really does it for him now, he needs something more; so he's developed a fetish about imposing himself on vulnerable people overseas now. Once he'd finished his opening speech he had to rush to the nearest loo; I bet he could barely contain that eruption of pleasure, a feeling he's not had for many a year...
Wrecker I have it on good authority that there are some other commando units in the area as well, not just 3 commando, training for deployment.
Wrecker I have it on good authority that there are some other commando units in the area as well, not just 3 commando, training for deployment.
Ummm, 3 commando is the brigade which all commando units are within.
Many are on the med tour at present, which gets diverted on a regular basis......
Heh kk. The amount of damn names the different groups have gets confusing.
FFS did anyone just see the news? Dropping napalm on a school playground? Surely we must do something. Almost in tears watching that report.
Is napalm classed as a wmd?
Why should we go to war based on dead children, we killed plenty ourselves in iraq.
No, will our intervention actually saves more lives than its long term consequences kill.
The "No"s have it.
Phew! That was close!
Cut the head off the snake and then let the people decide.
Tiny wee bit of faith restored in politics.
Government defeated, no strike on Syria
at least it keeps us plebians minds off a failing bank and shop chain,high cost of housing to rent and buy,high unemployment,covered up by educational courses of dubious merit,a failing nhs,failing established companies and a failing high street, higher fuel costs due uncertinity in the middle east, and the start of XFactor on saturday.
oh and the vote has refused cameroonoboomas wish to bomb innocent people.
Liking wrecker's idea alot. Can't see any way that our involvement would end well or really save lives in the long run. I take ernie's point but still prefer leaving them to fight it out amongst themselves till Russia/China lay down the rules.
hopefully cameroon and vague will now resign and let some other talking head take charge,somebody who doesnt live on the shoulder of obooma.
Bet Tony's happy anyway, he's gutted the ability of Britain to go to war due to massive public cynicism. Tony in his desire to show Britain is still an international player has done precisely the opposite.
Bahahahaarr... the cockwomble. He probably doesnt care though.
Russia/China lay down the rules.
Two countries that appear to have their heads screwed on when it comes to invading/attacking other nations.
Two countries that appear to have their heads screwed on when it comes to invading/attacking other nations
I don't think their track record is any worse (!) than Americas!
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783 ]vote says no [/url]
one things for sure, If Assad uses CW again, Miliband is doomed! 😯
Both votes no - a pleasant surprise. I hope that the BBC is correct in concluding that this rules out us joining any US-led strikes.
Clegg refused to rule out the use of UK-owned facilities (e.g. Akrotiri)
one things for sure, If Assad uses CW again, Miliband is doomed!
Why is that for sure ?
Opposing "punitive" strikes against Syria is very much in keeping with the wishes of the British electorate.
And Labour are a minority party in the House of Commons, for Cameron to lose the vote required MPs from his party to vote against.
I don't see any reason why Miliband might be be "doomed" by any future events in Syria. His political fortunes aren't tied up in the developments of a middle eastern country.
I think we should butt out of the civil war down there. Let some other country waste lives and money on the futile mission of trying to change a culture that is so vastly different from our own!
Sabre rattling politicians should face a tour of duty on the front line. That'd shut the bxxtards up!
Doh!, i had two threads open and i posted this below on the wrong thread, so i hope no one will take offence if i bring/copy&paste it over here where i thought i had posted it......anyway i'll add to it seeing i'm here now : I've not heard any politician raise this issue but i think it is incredibly suspect that chemical weapons were used when the UN inspection team were on the ground in Syria, Obama all but promised that any such reaction or escalation to use of chemical weapons would lead to US involvement which realistically means an end to Assad/syrian regime however you parcel it up, and as for this evidence that Cameron mentioned? - publish it all.
If we (collective western nations = US/Europe) should remove ourselves from meddling in the middle east as some have mentioned throughout this thread then i trust that we will also remove ourselves from support (military and political/financial) for Israel and let them stand on their own so to speak?, perhaps that will irk some people on this forum but it's exactly what i would say to someones face so i believe it's a fair comment to express and in no way supposes any disrespect to what happened 70+ years ago before i get shot down.
[i]From other thread below[/i]
Being devils advocate here and trying to see who benefits from an airstrike/regime change/possible ground war in Syria leaves one neighbouring country out in front, I don't buy it that Assad/syrian army sanctioned or used chemical weapons when the previous week Obama laid out a clear intention that if such weapons were used then the US would intervene, not to mention use them when UN inspectors were on the ground?, he may be crazy but that is hanging upside down bat-shit crazy. - Say what you like about Assad, and i'm sure he does deserve his reputation as there is no doubt he is as despicable and ruthless as he's made out to be but i do not think he is suicidal, nor do i imagine he wishes his government to fall due to US led airstrikes which is the only possible outcome he could expect if he used such chemical weapons against his own people.
Is it really above suspicion that a neighbouring country could have committed such an atrocious act to finger the Assad regime and engender it's removal?, if syria does fall then Iran may be next and then?.......
Someone is stirring the shit in the middle east.
IMHO of course.
As to the track record and credibility of Russia and China, one is a regime that will execute and persecute someone for being gay, and who has a terrible and recent post war record for geonocide on a massive scale. The other is a regime where their own people dish out unbeleivable cruelty to each other even when there isn't a civil war going on. But they are no worse than us.
the question was their record on invading other countries not on how they treated their own citizens
I don't understand why Israel would want to destabilise Syria, they were about to start negotiations regarding the Golan heights and that borders been very stable since 73, why would they want some Saudi sponsored nutters as neighbours instead of the very stable regime (like Jordan and Mubaraks Egypt).
the question was their record on invading other countries not on how they treated their own citizens
Well , Georgia wasn't that long ago, and the Chinese are having numerous stand offs with their neighbours over disputed territory...
Well there's a surprise! I went to bed expecting a rubber stamp vote, only to wake up and hear on the World Service that the mouse has roared. Will Cleggeron resign? No, but they ought to, given that they couldn't win a vote on such a fundemental issue of that such as peace and war. I'm sure that despite the "I get it" speech that they're planning some kind of workaround. We'll probably be shown yet more convenient atrocities and will be implored to Think Of The Children. As for Miliband, he'll get a short-term boost from his success but, true to form, he'll fail to capitalise on it.
ohnohesback - Member
I'm sure that despite the "I get it" speech that they're planning some kind of workaround.
I am sure the winner will be UKIP ...
I am sure the winner will be UKIP ...
Judging by how gutted the likes of Paxman et al on Newsnight were last night I think the big losers are the journalists and news organisations who are not now going to be able to report on it. They looked like someone had p*ssed on the their chips.
BBc news are currently running the film about kids being burnt in a playground, so very tragic for them.
But will the bbc be there showing the massive death and destruction when and if cameroooon and obooma finaly decide to bomb inocent people, women and their children, all just so they canshow to ignorant people that they are in control, and hopefully win a next election.
No the bbc subsidised by the governmnet will keep the governmnet line and say the bombs only killed naughty people, and if innocents accidently got kiled , they whhere just in the wrong place.