Why we should support the war.

[/quote]

Sorry if I threw out some unneccessary words at you. I let my anger do the typing on that one. Yes, I do appreciate what you have to say. But I will still stand by the fact that we only know what the powers that be want us to know. I do think Britain will get more out of this than we are lead to believe, or they would not be doing it in the first place.

I really am tired of debating this now...finally. What will be, will be.

Again, sorry for insulting you.

hi Mike Mcrock,
the reason why Chirac got into powere was due to the fact Le Pen, the NF candidate ran against him in the second tier run off-the french press ran a campaign for people to vote Chirac, instead of Le pen, who got 17% of the vote!!!!!!!!! (see http://www.adl.org/international/le-pen_new.asp)
My comments about german extreme far right groups gaining bigger support in Eastern Germany is fact. I did not mention the current German coalition Gov't- if Germany and France were such an economic paradise, why are extreme far right groups gaining such support in Europe?

As for martin 2000, I can't comment on other religions but I believe that stoning women( to death) is part of the Sharia code of law for adultery. There is no court of appeal in Arab countries. There are numerous wars being fought bewteen different branches of Islam in various countries in the world. In Kuwait in the last gulf war, kurds were gassed by Saddam- is that not an inquisition as to who is the true followers of Allah?

As to the majority of anti war protestors being women, that is what I have seen to be the case in Edinburgh where stupid parents encouraged their kids to play truant, turn up in Edinburgh city centre and shout slogans. A kid was knocked down and killed by a car, which would not have happened if she had been in school.,that day as she should have been.

As far as I am aware, the UN did not pass a resolution for Kosovo. Therefore it was Nato (but mostly uk/usa troops)-who went in to secure the country without it.

The 700 bodies exhumed could have been killed by other persons other than serbs. Fact is Kosovo is now the criminal cesspit of the world due to the many albanian gangs settng up store there. Serbis's president was assasinated two weeks ago by far right serbian gangsters. This will eventually lead to another Balkans war. Turkey is moving troops in to Northern Iraq. This may lead to another war. Chechnya is a eurpoean country where chechen (moslem) terrorists are killing all foreigners including red cross and humanitarian workers. So why should we not support Russia against those terrorists. Interestingly enough the Chechens support the US/UK in the war against Saddam
(see http://www.amina.com/)

History is just particular people having a different point of view or perspective on a particular event. No two people see an occurence in the same way. So for historical events, facts can be misinterpreted or twisted
The far right historian David Irving insists that the Jews gassed in the death camps in Germany and Poland etc in the 2 nd world war did not really happen and was just western propoganda. No sane person would agree with this, but most far right extremists believe this to be the case.

as to Britain belonging to Europe, well at least we keep our own sterling as a monetary unit, not like the reest of europe.
Personally i do not take much interest in Israel/palestinian affairs as it is a 2 way sword. Palestine has never been a State so how can you claim Israel is building illegal settlements on it. It is occupied territory from the war in 1967 when arab countries tried to annihate Israel. it was palestinians who started celebrating when 9/11 happened. However I do feel that using pre-empted strikes against palestinians is illegal and this was one of the un resolutions that isreal ignored.

Shut Up Fool

What, you think Britain are still a 'world' power do you????? That all ended after the second world war, where our ever declining economy was hit beyond recovery. We'd been taken over by too many countires. 100 years ago, and yes, Britain was one of, if no the leading power in the world, however, now we're not even a leading power in Europe if it wasn't for America. We depend on them a great deal, as if we stay close to them, we retain the status of a world power, however, this is just false. If we went against America, and lost their power, the British miliary wouldn't be able to compete, or push itself around as it does now. Britain always supports America, and I guess it will do for the foresable future, thus are it's puppy dog. Britain with America can hold onto being one of the big powers.....

Have I hurt some military pride Mongoose????????????

sigh, the British Military are the best trained in the world. Shockingly equipped of course but we dont spend silly ammounts like America does, as for our relationship with America. Its a symbyotic, we get stuff, they get stuff (detailed ey)

You still seem to neglect the fact that History is about cause and effect. If you look at Chirac getting into power, you can't narrow you're reasoning down to an election. In many ways, you can argue that elections, and campagnes don't nessesarily make that much difference, depending on the circumstances of cource. You have to look at the causes that bring him to be a threat, what Chirac had done to bring about this move e.t.c. Looking at elections doesn't show that much, and things very very rarely happen in the short term, but are reactions to a longer brewing problem. If you want to look into this, I suggest you read futher than one article that is simply about his beliefs, as opposed to any party agenda, cause, or conclution as to why he came to lead. You need to examine the society, as within any deocracy, a result can be tracked down to the various stratas of society.

Economics has a lot to do with movements like this of cource, "If the tap isn't broke don't fix it". But economically sound governments can also have a rise of an extreem right. The NBP in Britian has become more popular, winning local council elections, and even winning a by election to get an MP into the MOC! Chalking this down to economics alone is a little lame, you have to look at the whole of society, the inforstruture, and weaknesses of the whole society to try to see where these parties are rising from.


If there was no war, then that child wouldn't have died, but you can't blame that death on the war...... What if a school burnt down, and all the children were out protesting, would protests then be a good thing? You can't talk about random things like that happening, things like this do happen, maybe the answer is not to keep children out of protests, but keep cars out of city centres!!!!!!!!!

Any parent who gives their children a good scence of moral, and currnet knowlege isn't a stupid parent. Children should be informed on these things, I don't believe in shielding them from the things that are happening, they're important, and if they're old enough, they should be told, and helped to understand what is happening.


I've not read your article, but I followed the story when it was happening. The people in Chechnya are not treated fairly, they have harsh curfues, and are treated as almost second class citisans. Ok, maye a bit extreem, but they're supressed by Russia, so why shouldn't they fight back? What do you think of Willam Wallace for instance? What did he do, he fought a supressive fource, that's what the Chechens did in Moscow. I don't agree with terrorist's at all, but their actions did bring my attensions to the injustices they were experiancing in their country. I also think the fact that Russia became even more supressive after this even is inhumane, and certainy not somehting I suport.


History is just particular people having a different point of view or perspective on a particular event. No two people see an occurence in the same way. So for historical events, facts can be misinterpreted or twisted
The far right historian David Irving insists that the Jews gassed in the death camps in Germany and Poland etc in the 2 nd world war did not really happen and was just western propoganda. No sane person would agree with this, but most far right extremists believe this to be the case.

I was using this to make a point, this is what the election was faught over. This is what some people were voting over. But in actual fact, I'd argue that it didn't have that much of an effect on the vote, as there were other more important issues than the single issue campage that seemed to be being faught by the Conservatives.

Bare in mind, that Isreal can still fight only because of US support, and is the reason the UN resolution is ignored. America (only america as far as I know) give them $1 million a day for defences. America's support of Isreal, and thus supporting the supression of the palestines is what provoked the reaction on 9/11. I'm not agreeing with them for one second, I think their reaction was inhumane, and horrible, but look at it form their point of view, it was an attack on the country which is chiefly supressing them (i.e without American suport Isreal, Palastines wouldn't be supressed). This is the hypocracy I don't like, it suits America to keep the power with Isreal, so it does nothing about the UN resolution, it's convinient, and profitable to deal with Saddam, so it decides that the UN law must be upheld. I think this for me highlights a big problem in American foreign policy, which I hope is addressed soon, if not under Bush, certainly by the next person who comes to office.

Come off it if the uk wanted to go it alone they would send the sas in and take out saddam and co that way.

Sorry i never saw your post b4 replying to kid a's. The brittish army is the best on the world.

Of cource they get something out of it, however, I do think we need America much more than America needs us. It's convinient for America to have Britain as a close allie, it's impretive Britain has America as a close allie.

To be a leading power you have to have the equiptment. There were some soldiers sent into battle on the Russian lines, in the 1st world war, who were told that the wooden swords they had would be turned into real ones by magic by their Tsar.... or at least I think this was the war.. pretty sure I've got the right country. My point is, you're only as good as your equiptment, you may be the best soldier in the world, but if the other guy has a bigger gun, you're training counts for nothing. Britain used to be very well equipt, when you look at the 1800's, the British army was huge, and navey easily the biggest in the world (i.e over half the ships owned by Britain or something like that). The fact that Britain doesn't carry the same military power as America is down to size, and equiptment, but this counts for a lot. The American economy can sustain that level of a military unit, our's couldn't. When we were the leading economical power, then we could afford to have a big army, as our economy is not in this league anymore, we can't.

If they could send in the ****in sas to knock of Saddam then they would do!!!!!!!!! It would be much less costly than sending down thousands of men to face possiable chemical warefare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Plus, think about how bloody costly this thing is.... if it was that easy, then they would have done it several years ago!