Can't find a poppy seller?

The Moleman · Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 2:12 pm Post subject:

Thing is Tony, I am against war totally. I do not personally see solving these problems through war as being the correct course. Most of these countries (exception North Korea, Belarus and Russia) are influenced by the US and it's allies. No need for bombs, words are required. A nudge here and a nudge there. Take Burma for example. The British could easily help put pressure on the government, which has one of the worst human rights record on the planet. However, we do not. Why? Because of the huge amount of natural resources there and the huge amount of interest in the country's economy by UK companies. It is not all about war. Action does not need killing. Justice is best served in a way that does not resort to violence, otherwise you end up being as bad as the other side. Look at Iraq, who is the moral victor there? No one.
_________________
Students deserve discounts for EVERYTHING!

The Moleman · Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 2:18 pm Post subject:

PS. Wear the poppy with pride. I'm trying to obtain one out here before the 11th.
_________________
Students deserve discounts for EVERYTHING!

Willincity · Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 6:50 pm Post subject:

I was in London today and noticed that hardly anyone was wearing one.

Ironically I gave a £1 coin to 2 Irish buskers by Oxford Circus who were wearing poppies whilst they were singing "wrap me in the flag, boys"

Also read this today in the Bellylaugh or maybe That London Paper what ever.....,

"It's extremely common for most presenters and guests on British TV to wear a poppy (I wonder if the floor manager checks everyone wears one before going on air). But I noticed on BBC World, the presenters don't wear poppies. Surely they should keep them on, as I don't expect British politicians to remove theirs when talking to foreign colleagues."

strange fecking world we live in
Confused

_________________
Just read about the evils of drinking and though it's about time I gave up this bloody reading.

Tommi_J · Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:15 pm Post subject:

Tonys Twostripes · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:03 am Post subject:

DMN · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:06 am Post subject:

The Moleman · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:28 am Post subject:

Tonys Twostripes · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:36 am Post subject:

Tonys Twostripes · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:40 am Post subject:

The Moleman · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:13 am Post subject:

deeuu · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:02 am Post subject:

Have I stumbled in on some 19th century discourse on "how great our empire is"? I await Tony's comments about "little darkie children being civilised and saved for Jesus". Rolling Eyes

What chance does Iraq have when their 'saviour' regularly puts its own poor, undereducated, sometimes innocent black citizens to death with a type of religious zeal?

Less than 50% of Americans vote, in 2002 they voted for Gore but still got Bush through legal chicanery. Isn't democracy wonderful Tony, oh, and democratic... Rolling Eyes

Saddam's death sentence was pronounced by Bush and Blair when they fabricated an excuse for invasion. Having a puppet court re-iterate it makes little or no difference whatsoever, except of course turning a minor despot into an Arab martyr.

If things were judged on the basis of public opinion, as Tony stupidly suggests they should be in this case, then Bush and Blair must be indicted for war crimes and the troops should be withdrawn.

Does anyone genuinely believe that either the British or US media would show sizable, militant Iraqi crowds demonstrating against this decision? I believe that a curfew was announced to coincide with the finale of this sham PR exercise anyway, so those in Baghdad who were out on the street should have been shot, logically speaking. Don't tell me double standards exist amongst the American occupying forces.

The very fact that anarchy reigns supreme in Iraq shows clearly that there is no popular consensus on this or anything else. So to cite a small crowd cheering in Baghdad as vindication is pathetic and laughable.

Even if you look at the "case" that was brought against Saddam it is hard to see much difference between the actions of the then Iraqi regime and that of the Bush regime in Afghanistan, except that the Iraqi Government retaliated for a direct attack on their head of state and 148 people died. Whereas the US retaliated against Afghanistan, for a direct attack on a financial institution and thousands died.

I would genuinely like someone to explain where the real difference is morally. Both in my opinion are wrong, but even in the UK people can be sentenced to death for high treason and firing her majesty's dockyards. What makes the actions of the Iraqi regime that different from that of other governments?
_________________
529 Surrender Monkeys deserve Agent Orange
Közeli helyeken

Tonys Twostripes · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:41 pm Post subject:

Tommi_J · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:01 pm Post subject:

deeuu · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:48 pm Post subject:

The Moleman · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:28 pm Post subject:

There were large demonstrations against the death sentence, I believe the BBC reported it, but they did not have footage, also read it in The Independent. It is quite dangerous for reporters to enter the Saddam stronghold areas you know!

Also, democracy does not really work in Iraq. If you were Sunni you voted for the only main Sunni party, same for the Kurds and Shi'ites. It pretends to be multi-party democracy, but in essence it is just 3 parties that are going to squabble over everything. It is not about politics and policies at the moment in Iraq, it is about ethnicity. Not the best way to work a democratic system!
_________________
Students deserve discounts for EVERYTHING!