Gordon's visit to the troops.

S

Splitlink

Legendary member
Messages
10,850
Likes
1,235
It is all very well for Gordon to talk to British troops about cowardly attacks by the terrorists. They want something much better than that.

The terrorists are laughing at those kind of remarks.

What he has to do, if he is going to help the situation at all, is to go home and work on what type of support they need and move heaven and hell to make sure that they get it.

Hitler was called a coward for bombing cities. It is standard practice, these days, so don't let us hear of "cowardly" attacks on troops. I see nothing cowardly about someone who is going to blow himself up in the name of his maker. That is pure ignorance and fanticism anda different kind of war is needed to fight it.
 
Splitlink said:
It is all very well for Gordon to talk to British troops about cowardly attacks by the terrorists. They want something much better than that.

The terrorists are laughing at those kind of remarks.

What he has to do, if he is going to help the situation at all, is to go home and work on what type of support they need and move heaven and hell to make sure that they get it.

Hitler was called a coward for bombing cities. It is standard practice, these days, so don't let us hear of "cowardly" attacks on troops. I see nothing cowardly about someone who is going to blow himself up in the name of his maker. That is pure ignorance and fanticism anda different kind of war is needed to fight it.
Click to expand...


It is brave beyond belief to strap oneself up with bombs or fly aircraft into tall buildings. On the other hand, it is relatively safe to bomb civilians from the air using all sorts of modern fighters. People talk total bollox, eh?
 
FXSCALPER2 said:
It is brave beyond belief to strap oneself up with bombs or fly aircraft into tall buildings. On the other hand, it is relatively safe to bomb civilians from the air using all sorts of modern fighters. People talk total bollox, eh?
Click to expand...

Cowards are those who run away. I think that it is a very dangerous policy to believe that that is the case with these terrorists.

Unfortunately, though, we have a serious problem. We can be accused of shooting innocents, like that poor Brazilian who was shot in London.

How do we tell the difference between the innocent and the guilty? The Israelis have had that problem for years. The only thing being that the Palestinians, also, have the problem and when they are told to stop----they stop, unless they are terrorists.
 
FXSCALPER2 said:
.............It is brave beyond belief to strap oneself up with bombs or fly aircraft into tall buildings...............
Click to expand...

Yes, and to be prepared to give up ones life for the cause means that one must really believe in that cause however misguided or crazy it may seem to everyone else.That means that you can never win a war against such people and the best you can hope for is to subdue them for a time.

However unpalatable it may be, lasting solutions only come from dialogue with them and finding some accommodation.

jon
 
barjon said:
Yes, and to be prepared to give up ones life for the cause means that one must really believe in that cause however misguided or crazy it may seem to everyone else.That means that you can never win a war against such people and the best you can hope for is to subdue them for a time.

However unpalatable it may be, lasting solutions only come from dialogue with them and finding some accommodation.

jon
Click to expand...

What do they really want, though, Jon? Would it be acceptable to us? I believe that the ones in faraway countries should sort out their own problems ( I confess that I did not, always, believe that) but what will happen when Iran becomes a nuclear power, especially with this suicidal mentality that they have?
 
Probably Brown was alluding to the use of a child to carry a bomb to the target, a bomb that was no doubt assembled by adults who remained well away from the detonation.

Understandable, but criticising people who stay well away from the front line when there is firing going on is a dangerous game for a politician, of all people.

For an edifying exercise, take a look at the Cabinet make-up, none of them tend to be 'front-line' in any sense - they are lawyers, journalists, political analysts, teachers, plus an accountant and a postman. Nothing wrong with these fine and useful professions, but what would you pick these people to actually run?
 
tomorton said:
Probably Brown was alluding to the use of a child to carry a bomb to the target, a bomb that was no doubt assembled by adults who remained well away from the detonation.

Understandable, but criticising people who stay well away from the front line when there is firing going on is a dangerous game for a politician, of all people.

For an edifying exercise, take a look at the Cabinet make-up, none of them tend to be 'front-line' in any sense - they are lawyers, journalists, political analysts, teachers, plus an accountant and a postman. Nothing wrong with these fine and useful professions, but what would you pick these people to actually run?
Click to expand...

It depends on their personal strengths obviously. I am not sure we want to get into the retarded american game of saying that serving in the military qualifies you to run a country.
 
Does it really matter in the end? It's all just fun and games, then eventually we die.
 
dey want guns n dollars, n sik low ridin cars...propa duppy ones dat wil outrun da po-lice
dey want bling bling, dey want gallies
 
FXSCALPER2 said:
It depends on their personal strengths obviously. I am not sure we want to get into the retarded american game of saying that serving in the military qualifies you to run a country.
Click to expand...

No, I agree on that. But I didn't mean front-line exclusively in the military sense anyway, hence the inverted commas. Rather, I meant these are not the people who are front-line in creativity, business acumen, innovation, technological awareness. In fact, they, plus the hairdressers and telephone sanitizers, would be the people on Douglas Adams' B-ship in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

From personal experience, lawyers and teachers have been some of the most awkward people to deal with on various levels, most of them being determined to lecture everyone else on how they should live their lives, and filled with a delusion that this is their right.
 
More interesting to me is the way that another 'journalist' (appearing from the guy's 3 o clock) seems to fell that guy by essentially touching him... bloody impressive these special forces guys!
 
arabianights said:
More interesting to me is the way that another 'journalist' (appearing from the guy's 3 o clock) seems to fell that guy by essentially touching him... bloody impressive these special forces guys!
Click to expand...

looks like another journalist actually.. nothing special about him
 
Well he knocks him down well... and I would be astounded if there weren't secret service filling every third seat in that room ;)
 
I just reviewed the clip (in slow motion ;-)... that "special forces" guy doesn't "knock him" down.

Just look at the pair of hands grabbing the attacker from behind and pulling him down :)))))

Good old "normal" forces in action :)))
 
tomorton said:
No, I agree on that. But I didn't mean front-line exclusively in the military sense anyway, hence the inverted commas. Rather, I meant these are not the people who are front-line in creativity, business acumen, innovation, technological awareness. In fact, they, plus the hairdressers and telephone sanitizers, would be the people on Douglas Adams' B-ship in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

From personal experience, lawyers and teachers have been some of the most awkward people to deal with on various levels, most of them being determined to lecture everyone else on how they should live their lives, and filled with a delusion that this is their right.
Click to expand...

And if they are lawyers, teachers AND socialists ---worse. :)

Plus, they are good at spending our money and borrowing it, when they don't have it, too.
 
Split - it can only be worrying that we have a Chancellor who is a former Marxist activist.
 
chilltrader said:
BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Shoes thrown at Bush on Iraq trip

Bad aim!!
Click to expand...

Haha great stuff !!!

bushes_iraqoil.jpg


bush_massdeception.jpg


bush_badass.jpg


bush_chickenhawk_in_chief.jpg


bush_chickenlittles.jpg


bush_flipping_finger.jpg


bush_finger_flip.jpg


"Published on Saturday, June 17, 2000 in the New York Times
Texas Executions:
GW Bush Has Defined Himself, Unforgettably, As Shallow And Callous
by Anthony Lewis

BOSTON-There have been questions all along about the depth and seriousness of George W. Bush. They have been brought into sharp focus now by a surprising issue: the way the death penalty is administered in Texas. In his comments on that subject Governor Bush has defined himself, unforgettably, as shallow and callous.
In his five years as governor of Texas, the state has executed 131 prisoners -- far more than any other state. Mr. Bush has lately granted a stay of execution for the first time, for a DNA test.

In answer to questions about that record, Governor Bush has repeatedly said that he has no qualms. "I'm confident," he said last February, "that every person that has been put to death in Texas under my watch has been guilty of the crime charged, and has had full access to the courts."

That defense of the record ignores many notorious examples of unfairness in Texas death penalty cases. Lawyers have been under the influence of cocaine during the trial, or been drunk or asleep. One court dismissed a complaint about a lawyer who slept through a trial with the comment that courts are not "obligated to either constantly monitor trial counsel's wakefulness or endeavor to wake counsel should he fall asleep."

This past week The Chicago Tribune published a compelling report on an investigation of all 131 death cases in Governor Bush's time. It made chilling reading.

In one-third of those cases, the report showed, the lawyer who represented the death penalty defendant at trial or on appeal had been or was later disbarred or otherwise sanctioned. In 40 cases the lawyers presented no evidence at all or only one witness at the sentencing phase of the trial.

In 29 cases, the prosecution used testimony from a psychiatrist who -- based on a hypothetical question about the defendant's past -- predicted he would commit future violence. Most of those psychiatrists testified without having examined the defendant: a practice condemned professionally as unethical.

Other witnesses included one who was temporarily released from a psychiatric ward to testify, a pathologist who had admitted faking autopsies and a judge who had been reprimanded for lying about his credentials.

Asked about the Tribune study, Governor Bush said, "We've adequately answered innocence or guilt" in every case. The defendants, he said, "had full access to a fair trial."

There are two ways of understanding that comment. Either Governor Bush was contemptuous of the facts or, on a matter of life and death, he did not care."
Texas Executions: GW Bush Has Defined Himself, Unforgettably, As Shallow And Callous

He shouldn't just get shoes thrown at him but instead a legal prosecution for Iraq and all his other crimes.

A SEARING INDICTMENT

Famed prosecutor and #1 New York Times bestselling author Vincent Bugliosi has written the most powerful, explosive, and thought-provoking book of his storied career. As a prosecutor dedicated to seeking justice, he delivers a non-partisan argument, free from party lines, based upon hard facts and pure objectivity.

In The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, Bugliosi presents a tight, meticulously researched legal case that puts George W. Bush on trial in an American courtroom for the murder of nearly 4,000 American soldiers fighting the war in Iraq. Bugliosi sets forth the legal architecture and incontrovertible evidence that President Bush took this nation to war in Iraq under false pretenses—a war that has not only caused the deaths of American soldiers but also over 100,000 innocent Iraqi men, women, and children; cost the United States over one trillion dollars thus far with no end in sight; and alienated many American allies in the Western world.

As a prosecutor who is dedicated to seeking justice, Bugliosi, in his inimitable style, delivers a non-partisan argument, free from party lines and instead based upon hard facts and pure objectivity.

A searing indictment of the President and his administration, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder also outlines a legally credible pathway to holding our highest government officials accountable for their actions, thereby creating a framework for future occupants of the oval office.

Vincent Bugliosi calls for the United States of America to return to the great nation it once was and can be again. He believes the first step to achieving this goal is to bring those responsible for the war in Iraq to justice.
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pat494
Crime and punishment
4 5 6
Replies
103
Views
13K
Atilla
Atilla
Pat494
Gordon's cunning plan
2 3
Replies
41
Views
7K
0007
0007
Joe Ross
Military Tactics and Trading
2 3
Replies
52
Views
11K
Swang
S
S
  • Locked
Pakistan
5 6 7
Replies
125
Views
16K
barjon
barjon
T
  • Locked
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.... Pakistan, Iran
Replies
2
Views
1K
TraderPattern
T
Top