Is it just me or has the whole world went completely mad?
Or, to put it more accurately: Is it just me or has Israel, the US and Britain gone completely coocoo?
Watching the news nowadays is like having a hot poker rammed up one's bum, twisted around, removed and then thrice smacked over the head with it (the poker, not one's bum).
There was an interview this morning with the British defence minister. He was asked what the solution to the Middle-East crisis is. His reply was that Hezbollah had to stop because they were to blame.
The interviewer decided not to follow up his enquiry.
HOW PATHETIC IS THAT???
Every country in the world wants a cease-fire in the Middle-East, except Israel, the US and Britain.
How strange is that then? Every country is obviously wrong, besides these three...
Let's make that statement ominous and scary as well: These same three countries are also the three countries who have killed the most civilians in the last 6 years!
Wooo Hooo!
One, I suppose, can see where Israel is coming from. They're following the zionistic doctrine which really wants to remove everybody but Jews from Israel. Meaning that the Palestinians in Gaza are a problem worth solving.
That the US, led by a homophobic, right-wing Christian imbecile supports their corrupt and facist policies is to be expected. I mean, they're out to destroy Islam, terrorism, drugism, communism and everything else which doesn't suit their WASPish mentality and they finance Israel to the tune of 3 billion a year.
Which incidently makes Syrie and Iran's financial backing of Hezbollah and Hamas look pitiful to the extreme. So, let's not use that disgracefully hypocritical excuse again, please!
And eventually one can't really expect anything else from Britain. Did anyone see that embarrassing performance by Tony "Prime rimister" Blair when the microphones were accidently not switched off?
Talk about someone having his head up his bum and still trying to shove it up someone else's bum at the same time! It was disgusting and I'm ashamed to be British!
Can't we tie the bastard to a Trident missile and shoot him off to Beirut?
I really don't understand how the media can get away with this biased reporting on the attrocities being committed.
Reporting along the lines of 20 minutes spent on 3 being killed in Haifa by a vicious terrorist assault and then at the end quickly mentioning 30 killed in Southern Lebanon by Israeli retaliation.
GOOD GRIEF!
I'm getting a Charlie bloody Brown complex just listening to the crap being spouted out.
I am glad to see all our own civilians getting evacuated. I just love people who go to a country when the going's good and then flee like rats when the proverbial faeces hits the fan. Instead of staying on and trying to help the wounded or something. God no!
I wonder, however, when these people reach the fair shores of Britain if they're going to look more kindly upon refugees from other countries. I think not. I think they're going to stay just as ignorant as they ever were. Which makes it an even greater pity they were evacuated, really...
Originally posted by shavixmirđ
Is it just me or has the whole world went completely mad?
Or, to put it more accurately: Is it just me or has Israel, the US and Britain gone completely coocoo?
Watching the news nowadays is like having a hot poker rammed up one's bum, twisted around, removed and then thrice smacked over the head with it (the poker, not one's bum).
There was an int ...[text shortened]... ever were. Which makes it an even greater pity they were evacuated, really...
Originally posted by shavixmirIsrael should push Hezbollah into Syria and keep "steamrolling", while the U.S attacks from the east, then Israel and the U.S. should invade Iran and level that sorry excuse for of a country with its whacked president. It's time for a "knock-out" punch. Start the draft, now! Kill all Islamofascistas!
Is it just me or has the whole world went completely mad?
Or, to put it more accurately: Is it just me or has Israel, the US and Britain gone completely coocoo?
Watching the news nowadays is like having a hot poker rammed up one's bum, twisted around, removed and then thrice smacked over the head with it (the poker, not one's bum).
There was an int ...[text shortened]... ever were. Which makes it an even greater pity they were evacuated, really...
Originally posted by chancremechanicYou mean: Kill even more civilians. Don't you?
Israel should push Hezbollah into Syria and keep "steamrolling", while the U.S attacks from the east, then Israel and the U.S. should invade Iran and level that sorry excuse for of a country with its whacked president. It's time for a "knock-out" punch. Start the draft, now! Kill all Islamofascistas!
Originally posted by shavixmirApart from your last paragraph which is a little chancremechanicesque i.e. set up some conditions, assume a mentality and then slag off that mentality, I agree with what you are saying. It is embarrassing to be British these days.
Is it just me or has the whole world went completely mad?
Or, to put it more accurately: Is it just me or has Israel, the US and Britain gone completely coocoo?
Watching the news nowadays is like having a hot poker rammed up one's bum, twisted around, removed and then thrice smacked over the head with it (the poker, not one's bum).
There was an int ...[text shortened]... ever were. Which makes it an even greater pity they were evacuated, really...
I believe Israel has every right to defend itself against Hezbollah and I believe Hezbellah has a right to defend itself from Israel. What really gets my goat though is that most civilised countries would not bomb the hell out of a Sovereign State that the "terrorists" are operating from just because it's the easy way. If everyone followed that line of reasoning, Ireland, France, Spain and many other countries, including much of the Middle East, would already be smouldering piles of rubble and Israel wouldn't exist.
Israel doesn't even have the courage to declare war on the countries it is bombing. Cowards if you ask me.
Anyone for some realpolitik? Interesting perspective:
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1186
"All the world powers assembled in St. Petersburg for the G-8 summit agreed that Hizballah started the war as Tehran’s proxy terrorist arm. They picked up on the attitude of the US president, who is telling Israel: Let it run; but keep civilian casualties down and don’t kick too much Lebanese infrastructure."
(Comments on source?)
Originally posted by shavixmirLet's draw up a cast list...who are the major and minor villains of the piece? What do they all want? I don't care who's to blame anymore...I'm sick of pointing fingers when it's clear that the only innocent parties are the dead.
GOOD GRIEF!
I'm getting a Charlie bloody Brown complex just listening to the crap being spouted out.
Originally posted by WheelyI doubt that the Israelis are cowards as are many who just tut tut from the safety of their own environments.
Apart from your last paragraph which is a little chancremechanicesque i.e. set up some conditions, assume a mentality and then slag off that mentality, I agree with what you are saying. It is embarrassing to be British these days.
I believe Israel has every right to defend itself against Hezbollah and I believe Hezbellah has a right to defend itself from ...[text shortened]... ven have the courage to declare war on the countries it is bombing. Cowards if you ask me.
Apart from that sort of wet remark which is typical of your panzy mindset, I suggest that if you find it 'embarrassing' to be British you should consider applying for Norwegian citizenship; we won't miss you.
Originally posted by PhilodorThanks for yet another totally predictable post. I KNEW you'd have something negative, faintly insulting (as you can't be quite as insulting as you'd like to be any more) and written in olde English to say as I wrote the "embarrassing to be British" comment.
I doubt that the Israelis are cowards as are many who just tut tut from the safety of their own environments.
Apart from that sort of wet remark which is typical of your panzy mindset, I suggest that if you find it 'embarrassing' to be British you should consider applying for Norwegian citizenship; we won't miss you.
Narga,ooops, Philodor even the UK has moved on in the last fifty years, slowly it's true, but you are going to have a horrendous time of it if you don't move on too. Try it, you might like it.
EDIT: And if you are not embarrassed to be British any more when it no longer has a will of it's own, no longer stands for it's old traditional values (and I don't mean all that digging up cockles on the beach stuff) and is merely a puppet then you have no idea what Britain used to stand for.
Originally posted by WheelyWhat's wrong with the last paragraph?
Apart from your last paragraph which is a little chancremechanicesque i.e. set up some conditions, assume a mentality and then slag off that mentality, I agree with what you are saying. It is embarrassing to be British these days.
I believe Israel has every right to defend itself against Hezbollah and I believe Hezbellah has a right to defend itself from ...[text shortened]... ven have the courage to declare war on the countries it is bombing. Cowards if you ask me.
Originally posted by shavixmirWell, to me it read like you are saying that the people leaving Lebabnon are probably going to behave in a certain way and the you condemn them for doing it. As chancre seems to do, it seems to condemn people for doing something you think they will do rather than something they have done. If you get my drift.
What's wrong with the last paragraph?
I thnk this article by Thomas Sowell gives good reasoning behing the Israeli's not wanting a cease-fire. www.townhall.com
One of the many failings of our educational system is that it sends out into the world people who cannot tell rhetoric from reality. They have learned no systematic way to analyze ideas, derive their implications and test those implications against hard facts.
"Peace" movements are among those who take advantage of this widespread inability to see beyond rhetoric to realities. Few people even seem interested in the actual track record of so-called "peace" movements -- that is, whether such movements actually produce peace or war.
Lebanese men pass by the wreckage of vehicles in front of a building that holds the Lebanese Interior Ministry's civil defense center of Tyre, after it was attacked by an Israeli warplane at the southern Lebanon city of Tyre, Sunday, July 16, 2006. Israeli airstrikes reduced entire apartment buildings to rubble and knocked out electricity in swaths of the Lebanese capital Sunday, and Israel dramatically escalated the ferocity of its campaign after Hezbollah rockets hit the northern city of Haifa. (AP Photo/Nasser Nasser) Take the Middle East. People are calling for a cease-fire in the interests of peace. But there have been more cease-fires in the Middle East than anywhere else. If cease-fires actually promoted peace, the Middle East would be the most peaceful region on the face of the earth instead of the most violent.
Was World War II ended by cease-fires or by annihilating much of Germany and Japan? Make no mistake about it, innocent civilians died in the process. Indeed, American prisoners of war died when we bombed Germany.
There is a reason why General Sherman said "war is hell" more than a century ago. But he helped end the Civil War with his devastating march through Georgia -- not by cease fires or bowing to "world opinion" and there were no corrupt busybodies like the United Nations to demand replacing military force with diplomacy.
There was a time when it would have been suicidal to threaten, much less attack, a nation with much stronger military power because one of the dangers to the attacker would be the prospect of being annihilated.
"World opinion," the U.N. and "peace movements" have eliminated that deterrent. An aggressor today knows that if his aggression fails, he will still be protected from the full retaliatory power and fury of those he attacked because there will be hand-wringers demanding a cease fire, negotiations and concessions.
That has been a formula for never-ending attacks on Israel in the Middle East. The disastrous track record of that approach extends to other times and places -- but who looks at track records?
Remember the Falkland Islands war, when Argentina sent troops into the Falklands to capture this little British colony in the South Atlantic?
Argentina had been claiming to be the rightful owner of those islands for more than a century. Why didn't it attack these little islands before? At no time did the British have enough troops there to defend them.
Before there were "peace" movements and the U.N., sending troops into those islands could easily have meant finding British troops or bombs in Buenos Aires. Now "world opinion" condemned the British just for sending armed forces into the South Atlantic to take back their islands.
Shamefully, our own government was one of those that opposed the British use of force. But fortunately British prime minister Margaret Thatcher ignored "world opinion" and took back the Falklands.
The most catastrophic result of "peace" movements was World War II. While Hitler was arming Germany to the teeth, "peace" movements in Britain were advocating that their own country disarm "as an example to others."
British Labor Party Members of Parliament voted consistently against military spending and British college students publicly pledged never to fight for their country. If "peace" movements brought peace, there would never have been World War II.
Not only did that war lead to tens of millions of deaths, it came dangerously close to a crushing victory for the Nazis in Europe and the Japanese empire in Asia. And we now know that the United States was on Hitler's timetable after that.
For the first two years of that war, the Western democracies lost virtually every battle, all over the world, because pre-war "peace" movements had left them with inadequate military equipment and much of it obsolete. The Nazis and the Japanese knew that. That is why they launched the war.
"Peace" movements don't bring peace but war.