West to use possible military action against Gaddafi

[Catzsy]

I'm on about the fact that people such as yourself and Antony Blair are perfectly happy to send young guys and girls to wars around the world, based on lies/sexed up 'evidence' and a strange notion that somehow the hypocritical west has the right/moral superiority to get involved in almost every conflict hence making another pigs ear of the situation. If you yourself went and signed up then I think you would think twice as hard about your support for another fruitless foreign adventure which only ends up in soldiers coming back in body bags, increases on the national debt and thats not to mention the damage done by the likes of shock and awe policies on the people living there who are already living in poorly conditions as it is.

Do you really believe if our MPs back in 2003 had all had kids in the armed forces we'd be in Iraq? not a chance in hell would they have sent them.

If the west didn't support regimes such as Mubarak/Gaddafi/Hussein and so on.. then maybe you'd have a case. But as our whole and entire foreign policy is based upon backstabbbing, lies and hypocrisy - you only send up creating demons such as Al Qaeda which come back to haunt us.

Your reasoning is just plain bizarre. As David said - if people don't want to join the armed forces they don't have to. What did they expect? Just to play with tanks and guns and get paid for it? War happens and if you sign up it means that you are prepared to go to war. Al Qaeda don't need any encouragement to terrorise the whole world. I actually thought before you didn't see them as the threat. What happened to your theory on North Korea.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think when they start spraying bullets into crowds of inncoent people who what freedom, that's when we should step in, and when has civil war nearly broke out over there before for us to have helped?

But we don't care about freedom as our record shows, so that isn't a reason for going in.

Your reasoning is just plain bizarre. As David said - if people don't want to join the armed forces they don't have to. What did they expect? Just to play with tanks and guns and get paid for it? War happens and if you sign up it means that you are prepared to go to war. Al Qaeda don't need any encouragement to terrorise the whole world. I actually thought before you didn't see them as the threat. What happened to your theory on North Korea.

They join to defend their country, not to be sent into harms way for silly reasons or lies which you still insist was a basis for invading another country. I very much doubt a lot of soldiers in the German army joined expecting to be sent around invading fellow European countries but they were by their despot and many lost their lives for no reason at all. The army is also now often seen as the only viable job for the poorest who live in appalling, dead areas around this country and around the United States aswell. They (the majority i'd put my money on) certainly do not sign up with the mind "I want to police the world, I hope Mr Cameron sends us into Libya". I mean seriously, why do you think Ron Paul raised most money out of all candidates from serving soldiers back in the 2008 Presidential election?

We don't care about freedom around the world so would yourself, David, Don and all the other pro-war supporters please please stop repeating this line because we are the ones who kept Gaddafi in power, Mubarak and Ben Ali. Also - Al Qaeda do not attack us because we are 'free' - they attack us because we have military bases on Arab soil and we are the ones who are keeping their corrupt brutal governments in power while we bomb people we have fallen out of favour with in the name of freedom. It is disgusting hypocrisy.

And until you grasp this simple notion we will continue to be attacked.

[xxMATTGxx]

Not quite sure how true this source is since it's a twitter account, although he says he's the "The Guardian's Iraq correspondent" but:

"Rebel leaders in benghazi confirm they're holding 8 britons who parachuted in 30km west 4 days ago. Won't be freed without contact from"

"The brits were carrying 'espionage and reconnaisance kit & multiple weapons & passports' a rebel boss says. Being treated as mercenaries ..."

http://twitter.com/#!/martinchulov/

[Catzsy]

But we don't care about freedom as our record shows, so that isn't a reason for going in.



They join to defend their country, not to be sent into harms way for silly reasons or lies which you still insist was a basis for invading another country. I very much doubt a lot of soldiers in the German army joined expecting to be sent around invading fellow European countries but they were by their despot and many lost their lives for no reason at all. The army is also now often seen as the only viable job for the poorest who live in appalling, dead areas around this country and around the United States aswell. They (the majority i'd put my money on) certainly do not sign up with the mind "I want to police the world, I hope Mr Cameron sends us into Libya". I mean seriously, why do you think Ron Paul raised most money out of all candidates from serving soldiers back in the 2008 Presidential election?

We don't care about freedom around the world so would yourself, David, Don and all the other pro-war supporters please please stop repeating this line because we are the ones who kept Gaddafi in power, Mubarak and Ben Ali. Also - Al Qaeda do not attack us because we are 'free' - they attack us because we have military bases on Arab soil and we are the ones who are keeping their corrupt brutal governments in power while we bomb people we have fallen out of favour with in the name of freedom. It is disgusting hypocrisy.

And until you grasp this simple notion we will continue to be attacked.

Again just another rant treating us like imbeciles because we don't agree with you. None of us have said we are pro-war and we haven't said we should invade Libya. You are so obsessed with your hatred of Tony Blair that you keep bringing it up the past all the time. Nothing else matters to you. You have simplistic views that are fed by the right wing media such as 'if you agree with war you should sign up'. Nothing original that I haven't already read in the media.

[-:Undertaker:-]

No sorry Rosie, your views are fed by the naive idea that somehow that when people like Antony Blair, Obama and Cameron invade other countries saying "we want freedom" you simply believe them with no thought even put into it despite the fact that it is a fact that until these protests began we were the ones propping these people up. You've nothing worthwhile to say back, so you just attack with the usual, boring and petty "right wing nutter, media feeding your views" no Rosie, I look at the historical facts and the facts show that we are hated because we do this sort of thing, we are propping these people up. This is why we have terrorism, blinded ignorance causes it because you refuse to look at the bigger picture, relying instead on soundbytes from our politicians which is conveyed without criticism on mainstream news, such as on the BBC and Sky. Did we prop up Gaddafi, Hussein, Mubarak, Ben Ali etc yes/no? yes we did. So why now pretend we care about freedom?

Freedom isn't a case for going into these countries thus proven by our record, so come up with a better reason or simply give up. Then again, judging by that last reply it looks like you've already run out of ideas of why we should go in and have thus had to go on some rant about right wing media sources. It sounds much like a parrot repeating what its been told to say, catchphrases like "Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map" or "Al Qaeda attacks us because we are free" - the first one being false yet portrayed as true by the media and the second one being a simplistic, childish retort to a much more complicated and deeper issue.

I hear these catchphrases time and time again and yet when I present the facts to people such as yourself, you simply ignore them.

[Moh]

Your reasoning is just plain bizarre. As David said - if people don't want to join the armed forces they don't have to. What did they expect? Just to play with tanks and guns and get paid for it? War happens and if you sign up it means that you are prepared to go to war. Al Qaeda don't need any encouragement to terrorise the whole world. I actually thought before you didn't see them as the threat. What happened to your theory on North Korea.

Did you know the army target low-level students, who most probably wont ever get a well payed job?

At my old school, there was a "bottom set" and the army used to visit them and give them talks and they used to go on "trips" to army training facilities. Strangely enough, the majority of this class joined the army.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You are so obsessed with your hatred of Tony Blair that you keep bringing it up the past all the time.

This isn't solely about Blair or Bush, I am criticising the entirety of western foreign policy then and now.

Did you know the army target low-level students, who most probably wont ever get a well payed job?

At my old school, there was a "bottom set" and the army used to visit them and give them talks and they used to go on "trips" to army training facilities. Strangely enough, the majority of this class joined the army.

Thank you, its also shown on Michael Moores Farenheit 9/11 where he goes around with the army recruiters and they go to the poor mall as opposed to the middle class mall because they know these people have no prospects in the areas which they live, in the schools they go to. Its all rather sad and especially that our politicians take advantage of these people to assert their own hypocritical foreign policy.

But then I guess we've just been listening to solely right wing sources haven't we? (except that Michael Moore is left wing)

[alexxxxx]

i think ive used the argument against the armed forces before about how they target people with little prospects and people with little prospects instead of bettering themselves, go into the army as they have no choice (and aren't making an informed decision) yet i've been told i'm wrong before by Dan. Not sure why he's changed his tune now.

actually it might not have been dan, i think it was that guy who was obsessed with the army.

[Jordy]

I don't actually see what's wrong with the army doing that. It'd be a waste of resources for them to target the middle classes and intellects for the basic army. At least the army is offering them an opportunity where the education system has failed them, it gives them something worth while and reliable to do for at least 4 years instead of turning to crime or working in a supermarket.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't see anything wrong with it either, but to pretend that the people who make up the army want to go around the world fighting wars based on lies, hypocrisy and so forth is total nonsense. Of course some will want action although i'm sure its a very different story when they loose a leg or a friend. Thats why I went onto the financial part aswell though, even if we all were behind more armed action - we cannot afford it.

i think ive used the argument against the armed forces before about how they target people with little prospects and people with little prospects instead of bettering themselves, go into the army as they have no choice (and aren't making an informed decision) yet i've been told i'm wrong before by Dan. Not sure why he's changed his tune now.

actually it might not have been dan, i think it was that guy who was obsessed with the army.

I very much doubt it was me, as above anyway.

But i've changed stances before, no secret of that.