Pighead Vs Iraq

Terry

indough wrote:

That's the real reason why coalition forces are in Iraq IMO, to stop the Iraqi genocide of it's own people, so what exactly is your point? I hope you weren't trying to connect the mass graves with anyone other than the Iraqi people themselves, because that would just be ridiculous. But of course the war is all about oil and nothing to do with defending our way of life.
As for not having a presence in Iraq, you're right, we don't. But if you fail to realize that they are fighting the war on the behalf of the entire western democratic world then I don't know what to tell you.

Hehe.
That cheered me right up.

Split from the mad maddie mega merge thread.

indough

Was that sarcasm or agreement now?

indough

I notice the kid who was 'looking to buy a tank' a while back deleted his wonderful contribution to the thread.

Orange69

indough wrote:

As for not having a presence in Iraq, you're right, we don't. But if you fail to realize that they are fighting the war on the behalf of the entire western democratic world then I don't know what to tell you.

What the hell are you on about? I bet if Ireland was sitting on a few trillion barrels of oil and wasn't forthcoming with it they would be exporting some democracy over here..

Just out of interest why do you think they are fighting the "war" over there?

indough

Orange69 wrote:

What the hell are you on about? I bet if Ireland was sitting on a few trillion barrels of oil and wasn't forthcoming with it they would be exporting some democracy over here..

Just out of interest why do you think they are fighting the "war" over there?

Have I been unclear in anything i've said then or do you have some form of visual impairment that stops you from being able to read my posts?

This whole anti-US thing has been played out, its a cliche, you need to find some new material for your jokes.

If you really think that the coalition forces are going about things the wrong way then why don't you take it upon yourself to go over to Iraq in an unarmed capacity and talk peacefully with some militia members. I guarantee that the parts of you they find will be shipped back home in a body bag.

Of course I forgot the war was all about oil. Global politics really are just that simple. It's just like, i'll go to the cupboard to find some food, if there's not enough there to last me for the next year then i'll break into my neighbours house, murder them then steal their food.

Why not ask yourself why would the US spend up to $4,000 a day per soldier to support their army in the desert for some oil, thats not to mention the cost of weaponry which probably amounts to more than they're making from the oil anyway, all the while they are losing men who could be back home working and supporting the economy, when they have a reserve in Alaska sufficient enough to support their entire country for over 100 years.

Aren't the energy companies the only ones benefitting from the oil there anyway? I suppose you probably believe that the US government is engaged in a great conspiracy with them though, all the while managing to somehow keep the people ignorant to the machinations of the upcoming new world order. Perhaps they're using mass mind control? Just to be sure you should probably stick on your tin-foil hat round about now.

Orange69

indough wrote:

Have I been unclear in anything i've said then or do you have some form of visual impairment that stops you from being able to read my posts?

This whole anti-US thing has been played out, its a cliche, you need to find some new material for your jokes.

If you really think that the coalition forces are going about things the wrong way then why don't you take it upon yourself to go over to Iraq in an unarmed capacity and talk peacefully with some militia members. I guarantee that the parts of you they find will be shipped back home in a body bag.

Of course I forgot the war was all about oil. Global politics really are just that simple. It's just like, i'll go to the cupboard to find some food, if there's not enough there to last me for the next year then i'll break into my neighbours house, murder them then steal their food.

Why not ask yourself why would the US spend up to $4,000 a day per soldier to support their army in the desert for some oil, thats not to mention the cost of weaponry which probably amounts to more than they're making from the oil anyway, all the while they are losing men who could be back home working and supporting the economy, when they have a reserve in Alaska sufficient enough to support their entire country for over 100 years.

Aren't the energy companies the only ones benefitting from the oil there anyway? I suppose you probably believe that the US government is engaged in a great conspiracy with them though, all the while managing to somehow keep the people ignorant to the machinations of the upcoming new world order. Perhaps they're using mass mind control? Just to be sure you should probably stick on your tin-foil hat round about now.

Wipe the rabid foam from your chin and answer my question...

Why do you think they are fighting the "war" over there?

indough

I'd imagine its for a combination of reasons really:

a)Finishing the job they cocked up the last time
b)The disgusting human rights violations in the state of Iraq
c)Islamic extremism is the new communism
d)Islam and Christianity haven't always bedded well together
e)Saddam tried to kill George dubya Bush's daddy
f)Islamic terrorist attacks on the US, didn't you get the memo?

I guess the oil is part of the reason, but it's definitely not as cut and dry as you believe. Remember that the money spent on war would have been much more beneficial to the US oil reserve if it had been spent on resource exploration. If I can realize this then you can be pretty sure that some advisor to the US government will have too.

Now is that good enough for you or should I type in braille?

Terry

indough wrote:

I'd imagine its for a combination of reasons really:

a)Finishing the job they cocked up the last time

Not a good enough reason to destabilise world peace.

b)The disgusting human rights violations in the state of Iraq

The death sentence in the U.S. and Guantanamo bay where prisoners have no rights.

c)Islamic extremism is the new communism

Green is the new blue.
Seriously, that just bollox.

d)Islam and Christianity haven't always bedded well together

Do you know anything about the crusades? I suggest you look it up if you don't. This is not a reason to go to war.

e)Saddam tried to kill George dubya Bush's daddy

That's because he ****ing invaded Iraq. What did he expect?

f)Islamic terrorist attacks on the US, didn't you get the memo?

I got the memo. The people involved were mostly from Saudi Arabia and were based out of Afghanistan.

I guess the oil is part of the reason, but it's definitely not as cut and dry as you believe. Remember that the money spent on war would have been much more beneficial to the US oil reserve if it had been spent on resource exploration. If I can realize this then you can be pretty sure that some advisor to the US government will have too.

Now is that good enough for you or should I type in braille?

You can type in whatever form you want. It won't make it true.

This war has nothing to do with Islam. It has to do with greed. Just like every war before it.

Pighead

Terry wrote:

Not a good enough reason to destabilise world peace.


The death sentence in the U.S. and Guantanamo bay where prisoners have no rights.


Green is the new blue.
Seriously, that just bollox.


Do you know anything about the crusades? I suggest you look it up if you don't. This is not a reason to go to war.


That's because he ****ing invaded Iraq. What did he expect?


I got the memo. The people involved were mostly from Saudi Arabia and were based out of Afghanistan.


You can type in whatever form you want. It won't make it true.

This war has nothing to do with Islam.

And nothing to do with Maddie. Warning to Terry for violently veering off topic. Unless you can prove that Maddy's in Iraq or is of the Islamic faith.

Mr. Presentable

Pighead wrote:

And nothing to do with Maddie. Warning to Terry for violently veering off topic. Unless you can prove that Maddy's in Iraq or is of the Islamic faith.

Hey Piggie, would you "do" Kate? I would

indough

Terry wrote:

Not a good enough reason to destabilise world peace.

I really think the guys in charge are a little more qualified to make that decision now in fairness!

Terry wrote:

The death sentence in the U.S. and Guantanamo bay where prisoners have no rights.

Hardly the same as killing thousands of their own people with VX gas now is it? Having said that I don't agree with their policy here

Terry wrote:

Do you know anything about the crusades? I suggest you look it up if you don't. This is not a reason to go to war.

Yes I do, i'm a qualified historian in fact. I don't have to lok too far back into history to realize that it was an Islamic group who declared jihad, however. I have nothing against the Muslim world, the stability of the freedoms we enjoy is my only concern in politics.

Terry wrote:

Green is the new blue.
Seriously, that just bollox.

Yeah that was just a lame joke tbh, sorry

Terry wrote:

That's because he ****ing invaded Iraq. What did he expect?

Because Iraq invaded Kuwait.

Terry wrote:

You can type in whatever form you want. It won't make it true.

This war has nothing to do with Islam. It has to do with greed. Just like every war before it.

Purely opinion

Why has noone bothered to answer my question from my previous post?

indough wrote:

Why not ask yourself why would the US spend up to $4,000 a day per soldier to support their army in the desert for some oil, thats not to mention the cost of weaponry which probably amounts to more than they're making from the oil anyway, all the while they are losing men who could be back home working and supporting the economy, when they have a reserve in Alaska sufficient enough to support their entire country for over 100 years.

In conclusion, I find it quite ironic that the latest poster child for the anti-war movement started a thread not long ago about getting a tattoo of an AK47. The mind boggles :rolleyes:

indough

Pighead wrote:

And nothing to do with Maddie. Warning to Terry for violently veering off topic. Unless you can prove that Maddy's in Iraq or is of the Islamic faith.

How dare you, don't you know that Maddie is involved in the higher echelons of an international conspiracy against the peace loving Iraqi militia?

Orange69

indough wrote:

Yes I do, i'm a qualified historian in fact.

Woah!.. stand back everyone.. this guys packin' an arts degree..

Terry

indough wrote:

I really think the guys in charge are a little more qualified to make that decision now in fairness!

More qualified?
Not by much.
It's their advisers who are the more qualified ones.

Hardly the same as killing thousands of their own people with VX gas now is it? Having said that I don't agree with their policy here

So it's not right if they kill their own people, but it's ok if the coalition of the willing kill them?
You know, just in case they pick up a gun and start killing Americans.

Yes I do, i'm a qualified historian in fact. I don't have to lok too far back into history to realize that it was an Islamic group who declared jihad, however. I have nothing against the Muslim world, the stability of the freedoms we enjoy is my only concern in politics.

Yes, but it was the Christians who took the war to the Muslims.

Because Iraq invaded Kuwait.

China invaded Tibet.
Where was the coalition of the willing when that happened?[/QUOTE]

Kiith

So Pighead isnt actually going to go and fight international terrorism in the middle east? I'm telling you...he'd do a better job then anyone else has.

indough

Orange69 wrote:

Woah!.. stand back everyone.. this guys packin' an arts degree..

Do you really want to subject yourself to further embarrassment? I merely stated that because it was asked of me if I knew about the crusades.

I would ask you what it is you're packing, but then it doesn't really matter because you're firing blanks either way.

indough

Terry wrote:

Yes, but it was the Christians who took the war to the Muslims.

Did you sleep through September 11th?

Terry wrote:

China invaded Tibet.
Where was the coalition of the willing when that happened?

To send an invasion force up against a nation of potentially over a billion enemy combatants with nuclear capability would be foolish to say the least. Especially considering that they were closely allied with Soviet Russia, the US' greatest adversary at the time. They learned their lessons there from the mistakes of the Korean War.

Pighead

Kiith wrote:

So Pighead isnt actually going to go and fight international terrorism in the middle east? I'm telling you...he'd do a better job then anyone else has.

Too right buddy. And Pighead would do it all by himself as well. Just give me a headband and an AK 47 and Pighead shall become HAMBO.

Iraq.....I'm coming to get you.

Orange69

Kiith wrote:

So Pighead isnt actually going to go and fight international terrorism in the middle east? I'm telling you...he'd do a better job then anyone else has.

No the theme of this thread is Indough (Who has an arts degree btw) versus the world..

Ill stop now before i get banned..

indough

Orange69 wrote:

No the theme of this thread is Indough (Who has an arts degree btw) versus the world..

Ill stop now before i get banned..

Hows that tattoo going for you, you great big peace lover you

By the way, I also have a degree in Software Engineering & Computer Networking (in which I achieved a distinction), an A+ Certificate and i'm a CCNP. If we want to go the whole hog then I also have a certificate in media studies, achieved high enough grades in my Leaving Cert, I workout at the Gym 4 days a week, and I produce music and study sound engineering in my spare time.

I don't really see why I should have to defend my educational achievements to some anonymous poster on an internet forum who can't win an argument based entirely on its own merits

Would you care to list your own achievements?

Kiith

God didn't make Pighead, I made him!

And i love these kind of threads. Always entertaining.

You Suck!

Did you sleep through September 11th?

Did you sleep through post soviet Afghanistan? And Might i ask if you slept through any lectures you may have received on contemporary middle eastern history?

The rise of wahibism, and its subsequent funding during the soviet/afghan of the conflict is the root of the current conflict and the troubles we as "the west"(:rolleyes: an ambiguous title if ever there was one) now perceive. In any case, Saudi has never been taken to task for its formenting of a violent form of islam that has usurped more moderate forms esp in the central asian republics. And further to that, when these extremists were perceived to be of use, the us and other's in "the west" were glad to bankroll them regardless of future implication, human rights or any of that other fluff "the west" pretends to hold dear. Of course as a historian you no doubt already know this.

In any case Pigheads interpretation holds truer.

Orange69

indough wrote:

Hows that tattoo going for you, you great big peace lover you

By the way, I also have a degree in Software Engineering & Computer Networking (in which I achieved a distinction), an A+ Certificate and i'm a CCNP. If we want to go the whole hog then I also have a certificate in media studies, achieved high enough grades in my Leaving Cert, I workout at the Gym 4 days a week, and I produce music and study sound engineering in my spare time.

I don't really see why I should have to defend my educational achievements to some anonymous poster on an internet forum who can't win an argument based entirely on its own merits

Would you care to list your own achievements?

I have a BSc and and SSc...

Bronze swimming certificate
Silver swimming certificate

_blank_

What the hell is up with this thread?

It just starts in the middle of an argument.

Very confusing.

Terry

indough wrote:

Did you sleep through September 11th?

I finished work early, watcxhed it unfold on tv and took an afternoon nap.

When I said the christians took the war to the muslims, I was referring to the crusades.

To send an invasion force up against a nation of potentially over a billion enemy combatants with nuclear capability would be foolish to say the least. Especially considering that they were closely allied with Soviet Russia, the US' greatest adversary at the time. They learned their lessons there from the mistakes of the Korean War.

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and sorry I could not travel both.

Down one road is a small guy whose ass I would easily kick. Down the other road is a gang of people who would kick my ass if I started anything.
I'm a bully, so I'll take the first road.

whiskeyman

Pighead wrote:

Unless you can prove that Maddy's in Iraq

She's hiding with the WMDs...

Terry

It was split from the mad maddie mega merge thread.
I should probably edit the first post to make that clear.

Orange69

DesF wrote:

What the hell is up with this thread?

It just starts in the middle of an argument.

Very confusing.

Its a argumentative tangent from the mad maddie mega monster manic merge thread...

Orange69

Terry wrote:

It was split from the mad maddie mega merge thread.
I should probably edit the first post to make that clear.

Be sure and mention Indough's credentials and that he studies sound engineering in his spare time!!

Ok seriously thats it, im done... Its too easy..

indough

Orange69 wrote:

Be sure and mention Indough's credentials and that he studies sound engineering in his spare time!!

Ok seriously thats it, im done... Its too easy..

What was easy, did I miss something? You were the one who started bringing up my credentials in a failed effort to be funny by bashing the arts degree, let's not forget. I only mentioned that I am a historian to make it clear that I wasn't basing my arguments on pure conjecture but actually had the knowledge to back it up.

indough

Terry wrote:

I finished work early, watcxhed it unfold on tv and took an afternoon nap.

When I said the christians took the war to the muslims, I was referring to the crusades.


Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and sorry I could not travel both.

Down one road is a small guy whose ass I would easily kick. Down the other road is a gang of people who would kick my ass if I started anything.
I'm a bully, so I'll take the first road.

Yeah in primary school its known as bullying you're correct, I believe in this type of situation it's known as military tactics and strategy though.

indough

You Suck! wrote:

Did you sleep through post soviet Afghanistan? And Might i ask if you slept through any lectures you may have received on contemporary middle eastern history?

The rise of wahibism, and its subsequent funding during the soviet/afghan of the conflict is the root of the current conflict and the troubles we as "the west"(:rolleyes: an ambiguous title if ever there was one) now perceive. In any case, Saudi has never been taken to task for its formenting of a violent form of islam that has usurped more moderate forms esp in the central asian republics. And further to that, when these extremists were perceived to be of use, the us and other's in "the west" were glad to bankroll them regardless of future implication, human rights or any of that other fluff "the west" pretends to hold dear. Of course as a historian you no doubt already know this.

In any case Pigheads interpretation holds truer.

No, believe it or not they don't teach you the entire history of human existence. Sounds like someone's taken a OD of revisionism today anyway.

Nice to hear from someone who actually has something intelligent to add to the debate btw, you sound like you must have one of those useless arts degrees aswell?

Terry

indough wrote:

Yeah in primary school its known as bullying you're correct, I believe in this type of situation it's known as military tactics and strategy though.

You didn't get the analogy then?

Let me make it clearer.
America is the bully here.
They didn't do anything when China invaded Tibet because they knew they would have their asses kicked, but had no problem flexing their muscles on two countries they had imposed sanction on and had little in the way of defence because of that.

Also, did anyone think of asking the Iraqi people if they wanted democracy?

kowloon

Qualified Historian is a bit of bull$hitism to be throwing around.
In the handful of years one spends in an arts course (or most other college courses for that matter) only a percentage of that time is actually spent on any particular subject.
This amounts to a few hours a week until you whittle down your subjects.
Far from an all encompassing knowledge of recorded history methinks.
The true value of the degree is in learning how to approach history, interpretation and analysis of sources etc.
As for expert knowledge of the crusades, unless your dissertation was on that subject anyone whose hobby is reading up on that period is likely to have a better knowledge of the topic.
A lot of academics like to use their letters as a defence against presenting a proper argument.
If you cant hold the debate without resorting to childish "im a proper expert" arguments you probably have no idea what you're on about.
I have no problem with someone presenting their argument without their head stuck firmly up their own @rse.

indough

Terry wrote:

lso, did anyone think of asking the Iraqi people if they wanted democracy?

Any that I when I lived abroad did, you don't get many here. But then again they were refugees forced to leave the country for fear of their lives, so ther opinions may have been a little biased. It's funny that those who live in such disgusting places run by bullies, such as America or Britain, are found as refugees escaping off to places like Iraq for fear of their lives though.

indough

kowloon wrote:

In the handful of years one spends in an arts course (or most other college courses for that matter) only a percentage of that time is actually spent on any particular subject.
This amounts to a few hours a week until you whittle down your subjects.
Far from an all encompassing knowledge of recorded history methinks.
The true value of the degree is in learning how to approach history, interpretation and analysis of sources etc.

I did already state that.

kowloon wrote:

As for expert knowledge of the crusades, unless your dissertation was on that subject anyone whose hobby is reading up on that period is likely to have a better knowledge of the topic.

I do read a bit about it in my spare time though too tbh. Obviously its a topic in history thats quite relevant nowdays and all. I never claimed expert knowledge by the way.

kowloon wrote:

A lot of academics like to use their letters as a defence against presenting a proper argument.
If you cant hold the debate without resorting to childish "im a proper expert" arguments you probably have no idea what you're on about.
I have no problem with someone presenting their argument without their head stuck firmly up their own @rse.

I never claimed expert knowledge as I said, and I did present a proper argument. the problem is that everyone here had already made up their minds beforehand, noone listens to the opposite view on subjects like this. I'm guilty of it as is everyone else here. I can assure you that I do know what i'm on about, I never intended to ring up any intellectual snobbery, it just gets my back up when everyone and their mother starts chiming in with uninformed garbage talk.

Irish Wolf

indough wrote:

everyone and their mother

Everyone and yore ma!

Sorry, I couldn't resist

You Suck!

No, believe it or not they don't teach you the entire history of human existence.

As was said if you quote the qualification then your goin to be tested on it.....

Sounds like someone's taken a OD of revisionism today anyway.

Would you care to point out any revisionist statement's I may have made? I made no comment on 9/11, simply pointed out the context within which it occured. Revisionism is to say that something completely different happened. Where have I contradicted the events of 9/11 or the events before hand?

you sound like you must have one of those useless arts degrees aswell?

Useless science degree, but I never brought it up. Nor would I care to start lecturing anyone on quantum physics anytime soon......

indough

You Suck! wrote:

Revisionism is to say that something completely different happened.

No, revisionism (revisionist history i'm talking about) is revised history. It doesn't have to be completely different, just a little different to the way it was taught before. Of course if it was completely different then that would also count.

In regards to the past influences which are now biting America in the ass, yes we all know that they trained the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, provided Osama with weapons and backed the takeover of Iraq by Saddam, but that was what the situation called for at the time. Noone is able to predict the future and we have to deal with these situations as they arise.

You Suck! wrote:

Useless science degree, but I never brought it up. Nor would I care to start lecturing anyone on quantum physics anytime soon......

Put your claws back i I wasn't having a pop at you

kowloon

Fair enough, ill give you that, but if your argument is correct you should be able to prove it without resorting to my opinion is better than yours.
Give the self proclaimed experts enough rope to hang themselves.

Dr.JDeCourcy anyone?

Zebra3

indough wrote:

Do you really want to subject yourself to further embarrassment?

Only one person in this thread showing themselves up.

As if the US ever cared for human rights unless it suited their agenda. Why during their War of Terror have they an ally like Uzbekistan (where political opponents are boiled alive) if they are so concerned with human rights?

Who the hell do they think they are to lecture about human rights and go to war over it considering the genocide they carried out in Indo-China and the genocide they backed in Nicaragua?

Who do you think put Saddam in power in the first place and who backed him when he gassed the Kurds in the 80s?

You Suck! wrote:

Did you sleep through post soviet Afghanistan? And Might i ask if you slept through any lectures you may have received on contemporary middle eastern history?

The rise of wahibism, and its subsequent funding during the soviet/afghan of the conflict is the root of the current conflict and the troubles we as "the west" ( :rolleyes: an ambiguous title if ever there was one) now perceive. In any case, Saudi has never been taken to task for its formenting of a violent form of islam that has usurped more moderate forms esp in the central asian republics. And further to that, when these extremists were perceived to be of use, the us and other's in "the west" were glad to bankroll them regardless of future implication, human rights or any of that other fluff "the west" pretends to hold dear. Of course as a historian you no doubt already know this.

^^Well said.

indough

kowloon wrote:

Fair enough, ill give you that, but if your argument is correct you should be able to prove it without resorting to my opinion is better than yours.
Give the self proclaimed experts enough rope to hang themselves.

Dr.JDeCourcy anyone?

Like I said I got a little defensive when the thread became more like a personal attack on me. Maybe it wasn't but it began to feel that way.

Pherekydes

Damn, I thought this thread was gonna be about Pighead! Damn.

Can I just state my intellectual achievements before I join in? I have the Inter cert.

Now, with that qualification out of the way, and the realisation that bombing the sh!te out of D'Iraqis was just for their own good, can I just ask a small wee question (of the coalition for keeping me safe and sound in my bed at night without asking):

Can we not bomb Zimbabwe?

Surely there are lots of Zimbabweans who are going to be killed and tortured and dispossessed by their own government? Can't the coalition of willing western governments who care about cleaning up the world do it much more efficiently?

The Zimbabweans will thank us for it.






Memo to George and Tony, sorry Gordon: Cancel that last request! Zimbabwe has fcuk all resources worth robbing.

Terry

indough wrote:

In regards to the past influences which are now biting America in the ass, yes we all know that they trained the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, provided Osama with weapons and backed the takeover of Iraq by Saddam, but that was what the situation called for at the time. Noone is able to predict the future and we have to deal with these situations as they arise.

So what's going to happen in 15 years time when America decides they no longer like the then Iraqi government?

What gives America the right to dictate what happens in foreign countries?

Iraq was absolutely no threat to anyone. This was proven as fact by the lack of WMD's that were supposedly there.
There were reports the weapons were moved to Syria. Why was Syria not invaded?

Slutmonkey57b

indough wrote:

Hows that tattoo going for you, you great big peace lover you

By the way, I also have a degree in Software Engineering & Computer Networking (in which I achieved a distinction), an A+ Certificate and i'm a CCNP. If we want to go the whole hog then I also have a certificate in media studies, achieved high enough grades in my Leaving Cert, I workout at the Gym 4 days a week, and I produce music and study sound engineering in my spare time.

I don't really see why I should have to defend my educational achievements to some anonymous poster on an internet forum who can't win an argument based entirely on its own merits

Would you care to list your own achievements?

And no doubt you're a spectacular lover with a huge dick too.

This is the internet, so I shall use two simple nerd quotes to retort:

"Pics or it didn't happen"

and

"Tits or GTFO"



"Pics" because you can claim anything on the net without any facts to back it up.

and

"Tits" because Rule #1 is "everyone on the internet is a fat, smelly, hairy male nerd living with his parents unless proved otherwise." Show us your man-tits, dude.

You Suck!

No, revisionism (revisionist history i'm talking about) is revised history. It doesn't have to be completely different, just a little different to the way it was taught before. Of course if it was completely different then that would also count.

None the less I see nothing revisionist about what I posted, and it is also worth noting that the defination of revisionism is often assosiated with negationism which is the denial of fact. Hell, I didn't know that subtlety until I just wiki'ed it!

In regards to the past influences which are now biting America in the ass, yes we all know that they trained the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, provided Osama with weapons and backed the takeover of Iraq by Saddam, but that was what the situation called for at the time. Noone is able to predict the future and we have to deal with these situations as they arise.

I agree that this was the percieved need at the time considering the cold war, but as to what would eventually happen......thats what the cia, state department, countless analysts and all the other resources of developed countrys are there to foresee.

Leaving afghanistan to the mercy of chaos after all the fluff subsided, and then ignoring and even dealing with the taliban who openly hosted forces hostile to the west could only lead one direction. Not that anyone could foresee 9/11 itself, but that countrys respective self intrests would be negatively affected in the future, not to mention the suffering of the afghani's themselves. Sadly prevention in geopolitics seems only to serve as a justification for war and never a reason for investment in development.

A little known causulty of the whole affair is the loss of influence of sufi islam to wahibism. Sufi being a far more tolerant form, where its influence in central asia meant that islam co-existed more peacefully with other religions then in other parts of the moslim world. I'd reccomend you check out Ahmed Rashid's books "Taliban" and "Jihad", Damn good material for anyone whos intrested in the backround to events in that part of the world.

Put your claws back i I wasn't having a pop at you

Grrrr

Tho I do insist, THIS THREAD NEEDS MORE PIGHEAD!!!

indough

Slow coach wrote:

Damn, I thought this thread was gonna be about Pighead! Damn.

Can I just state my intellectual achievements before I join in? I have the Inter cert.

Now, with that qualification out of the way, and the realisation that bombing the sh!te out of D'Iraqis was just for their own good, can I just ask a small wee question (of the coalition for keeping me safe and sound in my bed at night without asking):

Can we not bomb Zimbabwe?

Surely there are lots of Zimbabweans who are going to be killed and tortured and dispossessed by their own government? Can't the coalition of willing western governments who care about cleaning up the world do it much more efficiently?

The Zimbabweans will thank us for it.






Memo to George and Tony, sorry Gordon: Cancel that last request! Zimbabwe has fcuk all resources worth robbing.

Yeah let the US bomb every nation that they don't agree with at once. They could use all those resources that they've plundered from all the other countries they've take control of. Because after all they're nothing but pirates. Pirates who just happen to have control of the most powerful nation in the world.

Lirange

Terry wrote:

Iraq was absolutely no threat to anyone. This was proven as fact by the lack of WMD's that were supposedly there.

Not only that but both Rice and Powell issued statements in the summer of 2001 that characterised the government of Iraq as not constituting any significant threat. The President, his adminstration, and the intelligence services deliberately lied. They assumed the war would go smoother and regardless of whether any weapons were found the American people would forget about it once the country was stabilised.

It was all a product of the Neo-Con think-tank disaster called the "Project for a New American Century" which wormed it's way into the administration through Cheney. 9/11 gave them the political climate they could exploit for their agenda. Even before the Afghanistan campaign was underway they we're already anxious to fix their cross hairs on Iraq (verified by reliable insiders ... most notably Richard Clarke). It was going to be part of a campaign to bring democracy to the Middle East. The idea was to project American power into the region as an agent of "democratisation." They believed that once Iraq came through the others would fall into step like dominoes. It's been a key geo strategic region throughout history (the Oil and it's obviously the crossroads of three continents): The Crimean War, The Suez Crisis, etc.

It's all completely delusional. Though Bush's incompetence is legendary and well documented his Neo-Con advisors obviously did not read up on events in World History re: bringing "western values/democracy/religion" to the "backward" peoples of the world. Sound familiar? Reading their dogma and waxing lyrical like Rudyard Kipling makes me want to vomit.

Terry

Who is this "We" you refer to?

indough

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

And no doubt you're a spectacular lover with a huge dick too.

This is the internet, so I shall use two simple nerd quotes to retort:

"Pics or it didn't happen"

and

"Tits or GTFO"



"Pics" because you can claim anything on the net without any facts to back it up.

and

"Tits" because Rule #1 is "everyone on the internet is a fat, smelly, hairy male nerd living with his parents unless proved otherwise." Show us your man-tits, dude.

Yeah I just made that up all at once, silly me I should've known you'd have picked me up on it. In case your too lazy to read the thread, the guy was belittling an arts degree which I only mentioned because the integrity of my knowledge in the subject was called into question. Is that such a crime?

Wouldn't you get a bit defensive if someone was trying to say that something you'd studied for 3 years of your life wasn't worth a ****? I suspect you would but you'll probably say otherwise.

Orange69

indough wrote:

I only mentioned because the integrity of my knowledge in the subject was called into question. Is that such a crime?

Yes.. its called being a twat..

indough wrote:

Wouldn't you get a bit defensive if someone was trying to say that something you'd studied for 3 years of your life wasn't worth a ****? I suspect you wuld but you'll probably say otherwise.

Please point out where i said that your arts degree wasn't worth a ****?

Methiks you have a bit of an inferiority complex relating to your arts degree..