When Britain refused to go along with Vietnam we saved both money and lives.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
If your dislike of Bush is so deep and you would have preferred the UK to have 'done a France' then I ask you to consider just how much influence
the French now holds with the US government (a government, like it or not, that will be around until Jan 2009).
......and, irrespective of the detail of how this arose, consider just how much - or should I say how little, influence France will hold with the US
for decades to come.
Sticking 1 or 2 fingers up to Bush might gladden the hearts of some but then what?
Accept that the UK is now relegated to the sidelines for a couple of decades?
Or perhaps we would just have to accept the cold shoulder for a decade or 2 - cos that's what happened when Harold Wilson' Labour government refused
to go along with Vietnam.
God I'm glad we didn't go along with that war; if only Blair
had been a bit more of a real leader (like your Howard Willson) then Bush might not have won his narrow election victory.
In anycase France is sidelined by the U.S partly because Britain is by America's side. But France has a lot of influence in Europe (some would say
more than Britain), it also seems to be taking the moral high ground.
France may have been sidelined a little by the U.S but isn’t that more because: whatever's going on in Iraq and elsewhere isn’t really their
business? How many troops have they lost? None, how much money have they spent? None, how far are they morally damned by what they’ve done? Not
Frankly I like the sounds of things "not being business" (it sounds kind of economical both with the lives and the cash). And yes it did make Chirac
popular and rightfully so.
The way I see it Tony Blair is George Bush’s poodle; and George Bush is Ehud Olmerts rockviller (or whoever else happens to be PM of
Did you know that Britain, America and Israel (I believe now joined by Poland) are the only nations that don’t want a ceasefire in Lebanon. I’ve
listened to fox and they talk of “Israel finishing the job” trouble is, over a third of the Lebanese have left Lebanon; I think Israel has got to
be one the most idiotic countries in the world not to understand that many of those Lebanese abroad are going to be pissed; whilst the many more still
inside are going to be even more angry (or just distraught or dead).
It’s arguably not even in Israel’s interests for it to be using the medieval type of war they are currently fighting. Yet despite Hezbollah being
no threat to the U.K or any of our interests (there not Al Qaeda are they) but we are still happy to support Israel in its folly anyway.
The BBC is happy to talk to one of the Israeli governments trained liars (Oops I meant government spokesman) about how hard poor little Israel; tries
really hard not to harm civilians, infrastructure...
Well ok but so far the Israeli air force has repeatedly attacked terrorist infrastructure like: airports (all 3 as a matter of fact), power stations,
grain elevators, oil tanks (some of which are now causing an environmental disaster...
I can just imagine what taking a flight there must have been like before the airport got bombed…
“welcome ladies and gentlemen to your trip on Terrorist International, for security reasons we will run through our brief drill… if there is
anything wrong with the planes engines please tell one of our staff, they will direct the plane to Israel, if there is an Israeli sitting next to you
please contact a tall man with a sword; these staff are all members of the Mudjahidin.”
“Ladies and gentlemen we seem to be having a takeoff problem; the run way has just been hit by a missile built in America, and supplied through
Britain using its Civilian Airports.”
Makes you proud to be British; doesn’t it?
The British involvement in the war on terror also seems a little silly so far.
We’ve lost over a hundred troops in Iraq www.guardian.co.uk...
Its actually 115 www.guardian.co.uk...
And about 13 (I think another two have died since this was written (12th July)
And an older source
Meanwhile anyone think Iraq is a safer place? Look at the cause of deaths.
Blair’s “Victory” Management...
What’s amazing is that about 52 people died the London terrorist attacks news.bbc.co.uk...
And about 100 on 9/ll
This is 152 civilians lost to terrorism; verses 128 (and counting) troops in the war on terror. This sounds impressive; until you think of all the
psychological damage to the troops, the missing limbs (not to mention another peoples civilians) (plus the cost).
This is the bill for involvement in George Bush’s war on terror; and as the London terrorists will tell you; we are more of a target now than we
were before 9/11. Why is that? Is it because there’s some stand by army which will now be directed against us instead of America; or is it merely
because there are more people willing to fight Britain and America? (I take the latter).
[edit on 090705 by Liberal1984]