UK, France, and others preparing to attack Libya.

[StefanWolves]

+rep say no more.

Blablahblahblahblah

We all know the real reason is so that you can slam the bigger parties hoping that someone will take notice and actually vote for UKIP. What you've actually neglected to notice is that UKIP will actually have to make the exact same choice if they ever want to get elected into parliament within the next century.


Libya has pretty terrible oil.


They have to draw a line somewhere, if they start invading countries because 'They're slightly upset about the way things are being run' the chinese will attack 'em whereas if they're terrorising their own people it's a whole different story. It might seem like a sharp contrast but that's politics.
[*]I do not think the western world has a right anymore to police the world, and only leads to blowback on our own soil.
Of course it doesn't have the right to police the world, but everyone has the right to take down some idiot who's firing at his own people.


Christ, it's as if you think this'll cost a billion pounds per day, all they're doing is dropping a couple of missiles and deploying some planes.


Not yet at least, but if Gaddafi has the nerve to attack his own people then what's to stop him attacking others.


Regardless of the 'real' intentions that you have forged if we were to lose a soldier to save 100 Libyans then that's a victory for everyone except Gaddaff's terrible regime.

Essentially what you're saying is that we should have left Hitler to slaughter the Jews and slowly take over Europe and only react when the entire conquered planet is at our gates trying to invade. What you are suggesting is that we should have let Hitler slowly murder millions of people because "he wasn't attacking us yet".

Basically, you are a supporter of Hitler's holocaust.

---------- Post added 20-03-2011 at 09:45 PM ----------

Btw Undertaker why are your posts structured as if your answering Prime Ministers questions? you do realise your not Prime Minister? :/

[-:Undertaker:-]

We all know the real reason is so that you can slam the bigger parties hoping that someone will take notice and actually vote for UKIP. What you've actually neglected to notice is that UKIP will actually have to make the exact same choice if they ever want to get elected into parliament within the next century.

Whether UKIP takes us into this war or the Green Party, frankly it doesn't matter. I don't believe i've brought political parties into this thread actually, with the exception of the Nigel Farage video which has been posted alongside other videos.

So nice try, but lets stay on topic shall we?

Libya has pretty terrible oil.

What total nonsense, 'terrible oil' is that why western companies all had assets tied up in Libya, to get hold of this 'terrible oil'?

They have to draw a line somewhere, if they start invading countries because 'They're slightly upset about the way things are being run' the chinese will attack 'em whereas if they're terrorising their own people it's a whole different story. It might seem like a sharp contrast but that's politics.

Its not about 'how things are run' its about political prisoner camps (you mention Hitler below, similar to the gulags/concentration camps, China has an estimated one million people in political prisoner camps). These regimes treat their people like dirt yet our politicians and people such as yourself don't give a toss unless its a regime which has turned against us, and then you want to go in with all guns blazing pretending to be the saints of democracy and human rights.

The hypocrisy disgusts me.

Of course it doesn't have the right to police the world, but everyone has the right to take down some idiot who's firing at his own people.

Why are Bahrain, Zimbabwe, Burma, Saudi Arabia exceptions then?

Christ, it's as if you think this'll cost a billion pounds per day, all they're doing is dropping a couple of missiles and deploying some planes.

War costs a lot of money believe me, money we do not have.

How do you think the British Empire went broke?

Not yet at least, but if Gaddafi has the nerve to attack his own people then what's to stop him attacking others.

Whats stopping King Abdullah attacking others? oh wait, he already is right now in Bahrain! but as they are both pro-western regimes, best to keep quiet about them isn't it!? shhhhh.

Regardless of the 'real' intentions that you have forged if we were to lose a soldier to save 100 Libyans then that's a victory for everyone except Gaddaff's terrible regime.

Ready to sign up then?

Essentially what you're saying is that we should have left Hitler to slaughter the Jews and slowly take over Europe and only react when the entire conquered planet is at our gates trying to invade. What you are suggesting is that we should have let Hitler slowly murder millions of people because "he wasn't attacking us yet".

Actually yes I think thats what you'll find my position on World War II and World War I is, non-interventionalism. The fact is that WW2 was a waste of time, British not only lost her Empire but we swapped the concentration camps for the Soviet gulags which ended in a killing spree which killed far more than Hitler ever did so - we attacked Nazi Germany while we were ill prepared and over-stretched over a treaty with Poland which was on the other side of Europe of which we had no hope of liberating. As it turns out, Poland ended up then being placed under the terror of the red army.

The killing is terrible, but it goes and and always will go on - are you proposing we invade China, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Bahrain, Yemen and Oman? its a yes or no question, I await the reply.

Basically, you are a supporter of Hitler's holocaust.

Mhmm surely you and western politicians are? because afterall i'm not the one whos been advocating and actually doing deals with Gaddafi while he tortures his politicial opponents in underground prisons while Antony Blair [the hero of you interventionalists] flys over and has some photographs taken with him. Do you have a tgerrible memory, or are you purposely ignorant of the facts and history of foreign policy?

+rep say no more.

---------- Post added 20-03-2011 at 09:45 PM ----------

Btw Undertaker why are your posts structured as if your answering Prime Ministers questions? you do realise your not Prime Minister? :/

Because I can easily beat people such as yourself in debates such as this because I have history on my side, which you do not. I continue to prove you wrong thus proven by the fact you yourself have nothing worthy to reply and keep posting smart arse comments in return. Reply to my posts and prove me wrong, otherwise keep your head down and walk on.

[StefanWolves]

Whether UKIP takes us into this war or the Green Party, frankly it doesn't matter. I don't believe i've brought political parties into this thread actually, with the exception of the Nigel Farage video which has been posted alongside other videos.

So nice try, but lets stay on topic shall we?



What total nonsense, 'terrible oil' is that why western companies all had assets tied up in Libya, to get hold of this 'terrible oil'?



Its not about 'how things are run' its about political prisoner camps (you mention Hitler below, similar to the gulags/concentration camps, China has an estimated one million people in political prisoner camps). These regimes treat their people like dirt yet our politicians and people such as yourself don't give a toss unless its a regime which has turned against us, and then you want to go in with all guns blazing pretending to be the saints of democracy and human rights.

The hypocrisy disgusts me.



Why are Bahrain, Zimbabwe, Burma, Saudi Arabia exceptions then?



War costs a lot of money believe me, money we do not have.

How do you think the British Empire went broke?



Whats stopping King Abdullah attacking others? oh wait, he already is right now in Bahrain! but as they are both pro-western regimes, best to keep quiet about them isn't it!? shhhhh.



Ready to sign up then?



Actually yes I think thats what you'll find my position on World War II and World War I is, non-interventionalism. The fact is that WW2 was a waste of time, British not only lost her Empire but we swapped the concentration camps for the Soviet gulags which ended in a killing spree which killed far more than Hitler ever did so - we attacked Nazi Germany while we were ill prepared and over-stretched over a treaty with Poland which was on the other side of Europe of which we had no hope of liberating. As it turns out, Poland ended up then being placed under the terror of the red army.

The killing is terrible, but it goes and and always will go on - are you proposing we invade China, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Bahrain, Yemen and Oman? its a yes or no question, I await the reply.



Mhmm surely you and western politicians are? because afterall i'm not the one whos been advocating and actually doing deals with Gaddafi while he tortures his politicial opponents in underground prisons while Antony Blair [the hero of you interventionalists] flys over and has some photographs taken with him. Do you have a tgerrible memory, or are you purposely ignorant of the facts and history of foreign policy?



Because I can easily beat people such as yourself in debates such as this because I have history on my side, which you do not. I continue to prove you wrong thus proven by the fact you yourself have nothing worthy to reply and keep posting smart arse comments in return. Reply to my posts and prove me wrong, otherwise keep your head down and walk on.

omg you beat me in a debate gutted. honest.

fact is you don't 'beat' anyone. what you simply do is reply with 1000's of paragraphs cause you have somehow convinced yourself that your argument is the correct one. to be honest i don't even bother reading MOST of your posts because most of your posts are full of brainwashing drivel.

[Ajthedragon]

Wow are you really that ignorant? Yea these countries may be 'interested' in the oil but the fact of the matter is that 100s if not 1000s are being killed because they are rebelling against this disgusting man and his disgusting regime.

The Libyan people want him out, most are to scared to speak out because the minority that do are being bombarded and murdered by Gadaffi's 'army'.

They wanted him out for years, where were we then. We supported the ****** just for their oil. Now we have to overthrow him to get it back and save lives. Wasn't exactly being ignorant.. It's my own opinion, attacking me proves nothing.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm sorry to sound arrogant, but I really am right - its simply just fact that we've supported his regime and continue to support others.

omg you beat me in a debate gutted. honest.

fact is you don't 'beat' anyone. what you simply do is reply with 1000's of paragraphs cause you have somehow convinced yourself that your argument is the correct one. to be honest i don't even bother reading MOST of your posts because most of your posts are full of brainwashing drivel.

Isn't that what you were doing at the start of the thread, lecturing Ayd and MrJordan and calling them ignorant just because they didn't agree with the drivel you posted? Pot kettle black mate, if you can't stand the heat then get out of the kitchen. You've met your match, somebody who is willing to debate you yet you've nothing worthy to say, perhaps because what i'm saying is factual and true?

Again, if none of it is true and its all brainwashing drivel, then prove me wrong. Make me look the fool.

[Chippiewill]

The killing is terrible, but it goes and and always will go on - are you proposing we invade China, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Bahrain, Yemen and Oman? its a yes or no question, I await the reply.

In order to attack a country in these modern times without getting nuked by the many powerful countries of this planet you need the following things:

1) A recent topical reason, for example a revolt where they are attacking innocent
2) The ability to 'win' the fight
3) Public support (At least to some extent), you don't want a riot on your hands
4) Approval by other countries of the actions

So my reply is yes if possible to achieve, otherwise no.

Mhmm surely you and western politicians are? because afterall i'm not the one whos been advocating and actually doing deals with Gaddafi while he tortures his politicial opponents in underground prisons while Antony Blair [the hero of you interventionalists] flys over and has some photographs taken with him. Do you have a tgerrible memory, or are you purposely ignorant of the facts and history of foreign policy?

As I just said, you need support to invade a country and sort things out. Until that point you may as well be chummy and try to negotiate. Surely you understand the way politics work; either you're enemies or friends.

Ready to sign up then?

Alas I am a coward and I think too much, I'm not the sort that would be able to do that. But don't go on about how if I can't go myself then how do I have the nerve to order others, because we've got ten rounds on that before and it's another pointless circular argument.

War costs a lot of money believe me, money we do not have.

Do you really think that the Government didn't decide to put some money aside a while back in case this was required?

--

So, do you support the Holocaust? If you were in Winston Churchill's shoes and realised that the Jews were being slaughtered for no reason you would do nothing?

Edit:

perhaps because what i'm saying is factual and true?

Perhaps:

- You're arrogant
- You're stubborn
- You're not swayed by reason
- You're a bigot

[-:Undertaker:-]

In order to attack a country in these modern times without getting nuked by the many powerful countries of this planet you need the following things:

1) A recent topical reason, for example a revolt where they are attacking innocent
2) The ability to 'win' the fight
3) Public support (At least to some extent), you don't want a riot on your hands
4) Approval by other countries of the actions

So my reply is yes if possible to achieve, otherwise no.

The United States has something like double the power of all world armed forces combined, the United States could go into a vast majority of these countries its friends and topple the regimes.

And thats not even including other NATO forces.

As I just said, you need support to invade a country and sort things out. Until that point you may as well be chummy and try to negotiate. Surely you understand the way politics work; either you're enemies or friends.

So in other words, its just as I said - not about freedom and democracy, its about friends and hypocritical politics (which includes oil interests). Why don't you lot simply just agree with me that it is about that and not about freedom and human rights? (because I have the examples and i've listed them, you've just admitted it).

Alas I am a coward and I think too much, I'm not the sort that would be able to do that. But don't go on about how if I can't go myself then how do I have the nerve to order others, because we've got ten rounds on that before and it's another pointless circular argument.

Ahh so its for other kids to die instead of you, so you dont really believe in it thats what you really mean.

Do you really think that the Government didn't decide to put some money aside a while back in case this was required?

No, just as it hasn't for the past decade (see the financial crisis and public overspending nearing £8tn).

So, do you support the Holocaust? If you were in Winston Churchill's shoes and realised that the Jews were being slaughtered for no reason you would do nothing?

No I don't support the holocaust.

Here's an equally as stupid question, Do you support the political imprisonment, torture and extermination of opponents of the Saudi regime, Chinese regime, Cuban regime, Yemen regime, Burmese regime and so forth?

Perhaps:

- You're arrogant
- You're stubborn
- You're not swayed by reason
- You're a bigot

Yeah well, your an evil facist/racist homophobic xenophobic bigot.

:rolleyes:

[Chippiewill]

The United States has something like double the power of all world armed forces combined, the United States could go into a vast majority of these countries its friends and topple the regimes.

Have you heard of these new fangled things called 'Nukes'? If other countries don't agree then they can 'use them' and then we 'all die'.

So in other words, its just as I said - not about freedom and democracy, its about friends and hypocritical politics (which includes oil interests). Why don't you lot simply just agree with me that it is about that and not about freedom and human rights? (because I have the examples and i've listed them, you've just admitted it).

Work with what you've got given, heck the negotiation might save lives.

Ahh so its for other kids to die instead of you, so you dont really believe in it thats what you really mean.

No, I'd prefer not to die is all. If they want to be in the army and do 'army things' then they can.

No I don't support the holocaust.

So what's this then?

Here's an equally as stupid question, Do you support the political imprisonment, torture and extermination of opponents of the Saudi regime, Chinese regime, Cuban regime, Yemen regime, Burmese regime and so forth?

No, can't do anything about that for political reasons (The whole, 'not getting nuked' thing)

Yeah well, your a evil facist/racist homophobic xenophobic bigot.

you're*

Also in future please have the manners to spell my name properly.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Have you heard of these new fangled things called 'Nukes'? If other countries don't agree then they can 'use them' and then we 'all die'.

Oh yes, but Burma, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, Algeria, Libya, Zimbabwe and so on don't have nuclear weapons capable of wiping our our forces/reaching our own soil. And even if you don't want to attack them, why have we got to arm them and cuddle upto them as we have done for the past few decades?

But I do understand what you mean by the nuclear issue with China, which is why i'm arguing getting involved is ridiculous - just as ridiculous as when we attacked Nazi Germany which we very very nearly all ended up coming under a terrible dictatorship and why? because our politicians attacked when we were over-stretched.

Work with what you've got given.

I want an answer here, its not about human rights and democracy - are you in agreement?

No, I'd prefer not to die is all. If they want to be in the army and do 'army things' then they can.

I'm pretty sure they don't join the army looking for bloodythirsty adventures, we have armed forces to protect this country. Why do you think non-interventionalist Ron Paul in 2008 raised the most money from active duty officers?



Imagine, i'm Paul and you are McCain - thats the kind of emotional argument you have going here.

No, can't do anything about that for political reasons (The whole, 'not getting nuked' thing)

Those countries with the exception of China don't have nuclear weapons, so again - why are they any different to Libya? why is it that certain brutal regimes are simply dreadful and need removing, yet other brutual regimes who are just as dreadful (some would even argue more dreadful) are our 'friends'? I say again, this is not about freedom, democracy and human rights - its about saving face and oil.

As we speak right now, pro-western Saudi Arabia is sending in troops to pro-western Bahrain - in order to do the same as Gaddafi is to his own people. Ironically, Saudi Arabia is part of the coalition enforcing the no fly zone in the name of 'human rights'.

[Conservative,]

As I said in Undertaker's newest thread - I don't believe it is right to be hypocritical and continue to support regimes like Saudi Arabia whilst going in on Gadaffi. In my opinion we have 2 options.

1) Campaign, promote and fight for democracy in all the Arab dictatorship states - regardless of our relationship with them (Which I am for)
2) Leave everyone alone.
You can't pick and choose. That is hypocritical and just shows that we're NOT in it for democracy, otherwise we'd be fighting against most of the regimes in North Africa/Middle East