# Libya & the idiot that is David Cameron!!!



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

When David Cameron was trying to get to where he is now, he called Tony Blair worst than **** over military involement in Iraq & Afghanistan! 

Now who's the one pushing for military action in Lybia (& has been from day 1) & is already commiting UK troups to Libya warning they could be in action within 24 hours?

So he's sending more of our lads over there to get involved in what will become another sniper war just like Iraq & Afghanistan, enough of ours have been killed over the last few years just send Cameron over he'll bore them all into submission with his inane gobshitting!!!

He wants too look important (wasnt that long since he was over there kissing Gadaffi's arse) He's to bloody quick to commit Uk troops he's playing with lives as if they dont count he's committed faster than Blair did Blair umm'd n arr'd about it for months Camerons in there within a matter of 3 weeks!!!!!!

They wont get rid of Gadaffi easily he has too many loyal fanatics, fanatics who wouldn't think twice about targeting terrorist attacks against the UK, Libya was responsible for worst terrorist atrocity the Uk has ever suffered the bombing of Pam Am flight 103 over lockerbie in 1988, & Cameron is antagonising him?????

This Idiot will bring England to it's knees in more ways than one & he's already got a good head start!!!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Dont even get me started on that twerp! I blame all the divvies that voted for the pillock! I mean my god does no one remember the 80's? 
Personally we are struggling more now with all these tax rises than we ever have and god help us when they have the budget next week!

What i dont get is how thay can afford to have involvement when they have to make cuts to the military too

Lives mean nothing to people like him who want to sit and look important, he has no clue what hes doing!


----------



## toria (Aug 9, 2010)

It dosen't suprise me :


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

So more young soldiers are killed & families broken by it just so he can look important!!!!

It's about time they started bringing all our troups home!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

I totally agree.... BUT he was voted in...


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

I am hoping and praying that our troops wont be sent there, i am the mum of a soldier who is shortly going to Afghan again, and the thought that he may get sent to Libya is even more worrying


----------



## metaldog (Nov 11, 2009)

harley bear said:


> I totally agree.... BUT he was voted in...


No he wasn't...There's a coalition government


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

libya is actually different to iraq and afghanistan

its U.N. and arab league backed,meaning that there will be no insurgents from asia and the middle east...and most places are by the sea.....if a full offensive takes place all airports and military installations/bases will be destroyed from the sea...gadaffi wont last a week.....now has anyone been watching this on the news?,young children and pensioners have been targeted by army snipers,he's now doing what he does best,threatening western civilians,he has to be stopped


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

It wont be any different to the troops that will be sent there,


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

hazel pritchard said:


> It wont be any different to the troops that will be sent there,


i doubt that ground forces will be sent in,but installations will be targeted making a no fly zone easier


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

metaldog said:


> No he wasn't...There's a coalition government


Technically it may be true but everything that Nick stood for had gone out of the window he has rolled over to have his tummy tickeled! He just wanted power....which he didnt end up getting.

We are all con-demned well and bloody truely.


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Maybe we could send in our peace envoy...or is it this week he's on a free holiday at Cliff Richards' place getting a tan....:glare:


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Sorry but I Can't understand why our troups are drafted in as soon as theres a problem anywhere in the world, in most of the god forsaken places they are sent too the people there have been bloody fighting & killing one another for 100's of years even before we had the ability to get over there!!!!.

Hazel your son is a very brave young man you must be very proud

They say no ground troups are going in but they've said that before & something always happens & they go in! Camerons already bleating this isnt gonna be another Iraq! *Yeah Right!!!!*

They didnt win the Afghan war (it's still ongoing) nor did they win the Iraq war again (it's still ongoing) & he's trying to start & be involved in a 3rd war in Libya!!!

I remember how Maggie screwed the uk in the 80's Cameron may as well buy a blue Skirt n jacket suit get a perm & buy a handbag because he's maggies double only difference is she had more balls than he has & ever will have!!!


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

0nyxx said:


> When David Cameron was trying to get to where he is now, he called Tony Blair worst than **** over military involement in Iraq & Afghanistan!
> 
> Now who's the one pushing for military action in Lybia (& has been from day 1) & is already commiting UK troups to Libya warning they could be in action within 24 hours?
> 
> ...


Yep but let's rip the guts our of our military first... then ask them to go and lay their lives on the line for a land that is not theirs!!


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

harley bear said:


> I totally agree.... BUT he was voted in...


Some thing like only 38% of the population voted....

Hazel:thumbup::thumbup:to you and your son....


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

northnsouth said:


> Yep but let's rip the guts our of our military first... then ask them to go and lay their lives on the line for a land that is not theirs!!


Yep then when they return tell them they are being made redundant due to goverment cut backs


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

He'd better better off sorting his own! country out first but then we are just second best 
He isnt going to get infamous by looking after us is he


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

As its widely said now ''there ain't no Great in the Britain anymore''


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

harley bear said:


> I totally agree.... BUT he was voted in...





metaldog said:


> No he wasn't...There's a coalition government


Well I didn't vote for either of the ###############:mad5: :mad5: :mad5::mad5: :mad5: :mad5:


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

Me neither......:cryin::cryin:


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

I doubt either of them will ever get in again!!!


----------



## CharleyRogan (Feb 20, 2009)

There is a difference through the libyan civilians WANT gaddaffi gone, whereas Iraq and Afgan the people didn't want us there in the first place. If cameron stepped back and went oh well its not our problem even though they have asked for our help, how would we be percieved?

I think we should be thinking about people less fortunate than ourselves, and go help them. We do not live in poverty by any stretch of the immagination compared to such places. Stop thinking about ourselves for once. Tories and Labour both as bad as each other. They pledge they'll do this that and the other, never happens, so doesn't matter who you vote for, everyone hates labour even though they loved the boom we had, then it went downhill, tories seen as crap as they took over in a recession and haven't brought back the country in 30 seconds flat and have to make cuts to save the money, labour and lib dem would be doing the same thing. Booms are all on credit and it comes around full circle. The 80's recession was worse than this and we got through it.

If you go into the army, you must be prepared to fight, whether you believe its just or not.


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2011)

I agree, this ISNT the same as the iraq/afghanistan war. The UN are involved, its not just David Camerons brainchild, and it is to prevent Gadaffi from airstriking his own people and slaughtering his civilians. I dont think the world, in good conscience, could sit back and let one nutbar of a dictator hurl bombs and bullets at his civilians.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I was listening to a good debate on television about this yesterday.One caller raised the point that this is a civil matter in Libya and raised the question,how would we have felt if an outside force had got involved when our students took to the streets?
I personaly don't think we should get involved,we are getting too much like America,go in all guns blazing then think later.*


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *I was listening to a good debate on television about this yesterday.One caller raised the point that this is a civil matter in Libya and raised the question,how would we have felt if an outside force had got involved when our students took to the streets?
> I personaly don't think we should get involved,we are getting too much like America,go in all guns blazing then think later.*


Is it really comparable to the student situ though? Its not a small sector of society protesting, its the mainstream civilians rioting, its not a democracy, they arent being managed and controlled by the local forces they are being shot and killed. The students were protesting against policy; Libiyans are fighting for their freedom from a murderous dictator... and its hardly like wev gone in at the first chance, the fighting has been ongoing for over a month now without any sign of resolve - its unlikely to resolve itself either, Gadaffi will just continue to order the killing of civilians.

*MULTI NATIONAL* forces will only be going if Gadaffi refuses to pull his troops back from civilian areas.

And again, i think it should be stressed that this isnt just cameron going in gun hoe - its a decision by the UN, and the no fly zone is supported.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Savahl said:


> Is it really comparable to the student situ though? Its not a small sector of society protesting, its the mainstream civilians rioting, its not a democracy, they arent being managed and controlled by the local forces they are being shot and killed. The students were protesting against policy; Libiyans are fighting for their freedom from a murderous dictator... and its hardly like wev gone in at the first chance, the fighting has been ongoing for over a month now without any sign of resolve - its unlikely to resolve itself either, Gadaffi will just continue to order the killing of civilians.
> 
> And again, i think it should be stressed that this isnt just cameron going in gun hoe - its a decision by the UN, and the no fly zone is supported.


*The point is imo we had thousands of students protesting as we did with the poll tax riots,which is down to our own country to sort out.Gadaffi has been ruling Libya for 42 years now,and lets not forget the idiots that have been selling arms to this madman,as we did with Saddam.(sp)
It might not be down to just Cameron but he sugested getting involved 3 weeks ago.
I'm sick of this country sending our troops into sittuations that imo have nothing to do with us.*


----------



## critter (Sep 14, 2010)

Hi, That's an insult to idiots everywhere. wayne.


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *The point is imo we had thousands of students protesting as we did with the poll tax riots,which is down to our own country to sort out.Gadaffi has been ruling Libya for 42 years now,and lets not forget the idiots that have been selling arms to this madman,as we did with Saddam.(sp)
> It might not be down to just Cameron but he sugested getting involved 3 weeks ago.
> I'm sick of this country sending our troops into sittuations that imo have nothing to do with us.*


Then we will have to agree to disagree  I dont think that policy protests/riots are comparable to riots to overthrow a 40 year long dictatorship. I couldnt in good conscience argue against preventing a government from bombing their civilians. Apart from the fact that Gadaffis sanity has become more a more questionable over the last few weeks (denying any riots, blaming Al queda for drugging their kenco!) - so I am thinking from a purely humanitarian viewpoint

Im not convinced their isnt economical reasons for attempting to get Libya back on track - Im not au fait with their exports but I wouldnt be suprised if we would certainly benefit from a swift resolution in some way. Call me a cynic! Oil would be my first thought, their was a "britan/Libyan" relationship from Blairs reign...


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Again I agree they are far too quick to send our troups to any conflict anywhere in the world! They are usually faster to respond when there is oil in the region where the conflict is taking place! We are getting too much like America in there head 1st sod the consequences as long as we look good!!!.

Again as I mentioned before these areas have been volatile & have been fighting & killing one another for 100's of years, many of them are brought up to be fanatics, Britain & America are the most hated country's in the world because they wade into conflict long before anyone else.

There is enough going on in our own country to worry about without wading into other peoples wars/conflicts.

As for poverty in the UK there is poverty in this country much of which goes unseen, & thats getting worse with the cuts cameron is making because those on low income who need help are being targeted! yes there are those who milk the system but *all* those people on benefit & low paid jobs are being tarred with the same brush.

One of the biggest causes of poverty at the minute is the continuing rise in gas & electricity prices, I pay over £100 a fortnight for gas & electric & Im struggling & in debt with british gas as are many people!

He's whining about how much the country is in deficit then pledging money & troups to other countries while people in our own country suffer, Im not saying they can't help other countries like Japan etc but our own people/country *SHOULD* be the 1st to be taken care of.

Yes some cuts needed to be made but he's doing too much too fast & sod those who are suffering because of it!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Totaly agree with you Onyxx and whats the old saying,"charity begins at home"?
In one breath they tell us they are cutting down on our arms and in the next they want to put their nose into other people problems.
I for one don't take in half the crap they feed us because you can guarantee they never tell us the truth.*


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

skyblue said:


> libya is actually different to iraq and afghanistan
> 
> its U.N. and arab league backed,meaning that there will be no insurgents from asia and the middle east...and most places are by the sea.....if a full offensive takes place all airports and military installations/bases will be destroyed from the sea...gadaffi wont last a week.....now has anyone been watching this on the news?,young children and pensioners have been targeted by army snipers,he's now doing what he does best,threatening western civilians,he has to be stopped


I'm sure when the fanatics, who support him, get together in years to come to plan a terrorist attack on the nations who sent soldiers to oust him from power, the fact that this action is UN and arab league backed will make a significant difference to their already distorted thinking and they won't bother to include Britain in their reprisal. I feel safer already!


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

yeah send them to war doesnt matter how much it costs 9 times out of 10 they havent all the correct gear they need because of spending cuts, then we have friendly fire so it's not just those theyre fighting they have to watch out for but the cac handed yanks too!

Bring them home in a box tell everyone how brave they are then *SEND THE NEXT LOT OUT!!!!*

Then when they've done their bit sack them when they get home cos we are so broke we need to make cut backs in our Army/Navy & Air force!

Sacremist you hit the nail right on the head!! best bit is they'll be taken in over here fed watered housed paid!!! then they plan who & what to blow up while getting looked after by the UK!!!


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

Savahl said:


> Its not a small sector of society protesting, its the mainstream civilians rioting,


Mainstream citizens were rioting in this country in the 80s when protests against the Thatcher government were rife. People even hung an effigy of Thatcher from a roof (pity it was just the effigy really). No other country intervened in our affairs.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I bet if we had to send the likes of Cameron and his cronies we wouldn't get into 99% of the troubles we have.Its easy to make others do your dirty work for you.*


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

Sacremist said:


> Mainstream citizens were rioting in this country in the 80s when protests against the Thatcher government were rife. People even hung an effigy of Thatcher from a roof (pity it was just the effigy really). No other country intervened in our affairs.


We shouted and threw a few bricks about, I think a few water cannons maybe got turned on rioters, but I don't remember any one getting shot at by snippers!


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> Again I agree they are far too quick to send our troups to any conflict anywhere in the world! They are usually faster to respond when there is oil in the region where the conflict is taking place! We are getting too much like America in there head 1st sod the consequences as long as we look good!!!.
> 
> Again as I mentioned before these areas have been volatile & have been fighting & killing one another for 100's of years, many of them are brought up to be fanatics, Britain & America are the most hated country's in the world because they wade into conflict long before anyone else.
> 
> ...


I 100% agree with this. We have patients in hospitals being neglected because we haven't got enough nursing staff to take proper care of patients. Did you see the documentary the other week? Hospital waiting lists a mile long and the elderly, who have worked all their sodding lives for this country, are being treated like **** and not getting all the help they need because of bleedin cutbacks.

All the pillocks in government ever do is give give give to other bleedin countries. It's time we started looking after our own. One day one of us or one of our loved ones could find ourselves sick waiting for treatment or hospitalised and left in agony sitting on a sodding toilet for an hour before a nurse comes to take us back to our bed. We could slowly starve to death because nursing staff don't have the time to sit and feed us even though we might be too weak to pick up a fork or spoon. The really nice ones will shout at us because we are struggling to swallow our meds.

If we are lucky, we'll get old and have the joy of being left sitting in our own piss and **** to look forward to because we cannot get a place in a day care centre and the home care staff only visit twice a day. Who knows, if we are really lucky, we could have a fall and spend hours overnight lying on the floor waiting for someone to come and see to us. Of course, there's always the other option: stick us in a care home, have the government take all our money we've worked our lives to save while we waste away to nothing and eventually croak it.

Let Libya sort out their own problems like the rest of us have to.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> We shouted and threw a few bricks about, I think a few water cannons maybe got turned on rioters, but I don't remember any one getting shot at by snippers!


No! The police just beat a few of us to death.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*If this country is in so much debt where is the money coming from to pay for this?Yet another excuse to screw us brits.*


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I really don't think anyone has the right to interfere in the politics of another country.

Any one would think it was only the British sending in our soldiers, I think you'll that the French Foreign Legion go out to these places before most countries, but they don't shout about what they do, they just go in do the job they are sent to do, and then leave to let other troops take over.

I'm not saying that our Brave Boys aren't doing a great and dangerous job, but it's not just us losing our boys, many other countries are the same.

And I don't think any Soldier should die for the sake for the politics of another country.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

No soldiers are being sent this will be a air and sea based operation. During the whole of Op Ellemy there will only be once instance when "boots will be on the ground" that involve any serviceman from us or our allies. And that will during any extraction of any downed aircrew. And this will be quick snatch and grab.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

The were Angels of peace in Britain...

..there were those who did not see anything wrong with Hitler attacking Poland... Polish problem..right?

and the Stalin joined in..then France fell, then Britain just about managed (Polish pilots ..right?)...


students riots and strikes in Uk are a bit different towant is up in North Africa and Middle East...

our Arab population are really worried if that may not mean civil wars in many countries..where fanatics may seize the nuclear weapons for example...and say..use it against infidels!


..no..it is not just my imagination...so the comarison with students' protests is a bit off the mark....

as to the involvement of our (Gibratlar is a part of it..we are the closest to the conflict zone!!!..our guys are sent to Afgan as well...) country..right or wrong ?...yet the perspective of not keeping the eyes on the ball and the price of it...


I am afraid the history will tell..I just so wish that Arab countries managed to establish governments that will not seek conflicts and revenge...and will take care of their people...


one world...I see Africa from my park....world which must be united in peace and justice ..or willperish..sorry for such big words..

..so "do not ask whom the bells toll"...


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> No soldiers are being sent this will be a air and sea based operation. During the whole of Op Ellemy there will only be once instance when "boots will be on the ground" that involve any serviceman from us or our allies. And that will during any extraction of any downed aircrew. And this will be quick snatch and grab. QUOTE
> 
> As others have said, it is not our place to interfere in the poliitics of another country.
> 
> ...


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Sacremist said:


> As others have said, it is not our place to interfere in the poliitics of another country.
> 
> Any battle will cost money, money that should be invested in the national health, care for the elderly and our education system.
> 
> ...


Swiss never had colonies..never had navy..stayed in the middle of the mountains since Wilhelm Tell and rented troops for good money..and sold weapons...

Britan - since about Elizabeth the First is no longer just a small island...

late now to wish it still was...

and I am sure gaddafi is not trembling....thinking about Britsh troops...

jsut hope for the people sake that it will not end in massacre...

what did UN do to prevent genocide in Bosnia?..here in Europe?...small country?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> I As others have said, it is not our place to interfere in the poliitics of another country.
> 
> Any battle will cost money, money that should be invested in the national health, care for the elderly and our education system.
> 
> ...


All I will say (due to restrictions imposed on me) is do your research on where the money is coming from, who is involved and the UN's involvement and how that ties into Libya.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> All I will say (due to restrictions imposed on me) is do your research on where the money is coming from, who is involved and the UN's involvement and how that ties into Libya.


*I say this with the greatest respect,as i don't know why or how you know so much.
Why was it when Sadam (sp) could have been taken out during the 1st gulf war were the sas told to stand down? Then a few years later we get into a full blown war with the country.*


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

Think it is all complete bull****, we always have to stick our nose into everything coz some puffed up little **** wants to look important.
We didnt want to go to Iraq, I marched in protest against it as did many others but Blair did what he wanted to kiss George Bushes ar$e (great democracy!), now most people I know do not want to fight in Libya either.

Why must our boys be the first to die, sorry, sent in?
Our country is on its knees atm, if the middle East want to slaughter each other then let them! It is not our right to wade in and enforce democracy on countries, let the rebels of Libya fight for their land not us!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

There is only one reason we are involved with Libya and that's *OIL*


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Swiss never had colonies..never had navy..stayed in the middle of the mountains since Wilhelm Tell and rented troops for good money..and sold weapons...
> 
> Britan - since about Elizabeth the First is no longer just a small island...
> 
> ...


Since when was Libya a British colony? How long has it been now since the collapse of the British Empire? Britain is no longer the important nation we seem to think we are. It's time we realised that and butted out of other nation's affairs.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> There is only one reason we are involved with Libya and that's *OIL*


*And oil is more important than life to the powers that be.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

People make out it is the UK rushing in, which is far from the truth. This was requested by many in the region. 

Nor is it for oil, research would rule Libya out for that reason, unlike other places.

Read up on the objectives of the UN and also of it's members maybe it will make a little more sense for you then.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> People make out it is the UK rushing in, which is far from the truth. This was requested by many in the region.
> 
> Nor is it for oil, research would rule Libya out for that reason, unlike other places.
> 
> Read up on the objectives of the UN and also of it's members maybe it will make a little more sense for you then.


*No! If we looked at it from Cameron's point of view we would have been in 3 weeks ago.But typical stupid politician that he is,he waited,told the world what he wanted then goes in.Now Libya is more than 2 steps ahead.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *No! If we looked at it from Cameron's point of view we would have been in 3 weeks ago.But typical stupid politician that he is,he waited,told the world what he wanted then goes in.Now Libya is more than 2 steps ahead.*


or is it??????


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> People make out it is the UK rushing in, which is far from the truth. This was requested by many in the region.
> 
> *Nor is it for oil*, research would rule Libya out for that reason, unlike other places.
> 
> Read up on the objectives of the UN and also of it's members maybe it will make a little more sense for you then.


Libya has some of the finest oil in the world, much easier to refine.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> or is it??????


*If we didn't broadcast what we intended to do we wouldn't give "the enemy" a head start..
As for my 1st question about the sas and the gulf war,it still hasn't been answerd.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *If we didn't broadcast what we intended to do we wouldn't give "the enemy" a head start..
> As for my 1st question about the sas and the gulf war,it still hasn't been answerd.*


Nor will you get an answer :tongue_smilie:


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> Libya has some of the finest oil in the world, much easier to refine.


can not be that good if less than 2% of the worlds oil comes from there :tongue_smilie:


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> can not be that good if less than 2% of the worlds oil comes from there :tongue_smilie:


There may not be as much as other places, but the quality is better.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> Nor will you get an answer :tongue_smilie:


* Knowing one of the guys that was there and didn't get the answer i'm not suprised. But that in its self must tell you something.
Goverments and their pawns are miles apart.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> * Knowing one of the guys that was there and didn't get the answer i'm not suprised. But that in its self must tell you something.
> Goverments and their pawns are miles apart.*


If even that is true, it has nothing to do with Libya or indeed what started there 90 mins ago.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> If even that is true, it has nothing to do with Libya or indeed what started there 90 mins ago.


*Sorry but i disagree.As i said in an earlier post,things would be so different if the powers that be had to fight these wars themselves.*


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

jamie1977 said:


> Just to note I am not pro actions etc. It just annoys me when people make comments without researching facts, or knowing what details make up such operations such as Op Ellemy. This is me....
> 
> I have some current operational experience and knowledge of how such things work. Obviously the Official Secrets Act restricts me on certain things but alot of info is available in the wider world, so use it before making stupid posts about effects on students, NHS and etc.


Er, you arent the first or the last to be/have been in the army. A good friend is currently fighting in Afghanastan and things do get back y'know.
Careful on that high horse, its quite a fall of it 

Id also like to point out that some of us find student fees the NHS etc much more important than a "revolution" in a country that has nothing to do with us and as a democracy we should have the say wether troops are sent in or not imo.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Maybe they would take a different view if it was them going to these operational theatres and not people like me who have been or indeed are in these theatres. But that does not justify comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or the comments on how the NHS, students etc will be affected.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

I dont want to see any of our troops lose their lives just because of oil,so many of these conflicts are to do with oil.
Troops go where they are sent, thats there jobs,


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Just to mention, cos it is hard to tell from that photo, I was in the Royal Air Force not the Army.

If this thread was on Afghanistan and/or Iraq I would be more neutral if not more agreeing with some comments. But alot of things tied to those conflicts can not be used against Libya. 

Obviously regardless of reasons behind such events, lives can be lost. The approach being taken is less risky than sending ground troops, but of course can still mean the loss of British Airmen. Whatever our views etc I am sure everybody here hopes no lifes are lost due to Libya of UK Airmen. 

Also I do not appreciate the 2 PM's I have received, nobody here knows what I have witnessed nor the reason I am no longer in the RAF.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

people that join the armed forces are plain and simple.Once you agree to wear the uniform you agree to do whatever your told to do,like it or not


My son is in the army, hubby did 22 yrs and both have said"i signed on the dotted line i go where sent" so yes they know what they are going to have to do, but i still think for the sake of oil its not worth loss of life for anyone.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

With all due respect for you & what your job is/was Jamie ( & think ALL our service men & women are brilliant) we all know that once the yanks decide to go in (& they will find a reason to do so at some point they *ALWAYS DO*), Camerons lips are glued to Obama's arse & we'll get dragged in there too, history repeated n all that !!!

If your saying the cost is nothing to do with NHS Student Fees & Poverty in the UK, seeing as this country is on it's knees just about & they *managed to find the money *to wade into someone elses conflict.

Then it's about bloody time he got his lips off Obamas arse & his finger out of his own arse & FOUND some money to put this country right before poking his king sized nose & ego into Libya's conflict.

Gaddafi will not be easy to get rid of the sly old sods been there for 40+ years & is surrounded by fanatics who'd die for him with out thinking Kill for him in a heart beat & use terrorist attacks when & where they think will cause the most damage!

Look at the poor buggars in Japan, they'd be better off sending help out to them, than wading into yet another conflict, theres enough death destruction & fighting going on around the world without starting another bloody fight.

But Obama will say jump n Cameron will say YES SIR!! how high & when can I come back down! & in the mean time Uk troups are being sent here there & everywhere & being killed because the likes of Cameron & Obama think they know better than anyone else!

I Know once they sign up as soldiers they have to go where ever they are posted BUT they are sent to every god for saken shithole where a conflict kicks off usually where they've been fighting amongst themselves for years n years!!!


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

hazel pritchard said:


> people that join the armed forces are plain and simple.Once you agree to wear the uniform you agree to do whatever your told to do,like it or not
> 
> My son is in the army, hubby did 22 yrs and both have said"i signed on the dotted line i go where sent" so yes they know what they are going to have to do, but i still think for the sake of oil its not worth loss of life for anyone.


I agree you sign the dotted line, knowing one day you could (or maybe in the current climate I should say *WILL*) get sent to fight, regardless if you agree with the reasons behind it etc.

Libya is not to do with oil though. As said my posts would be totally different if this was a general conflict thread, but it's not it's a Libya based one.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> I am all for the freedom of speech, that is something we thankfully have in this country, but they do not have in others


*But that is what our country fought previous wars for.Now as much as i hate the thought of living under a dictatorship we did fight for what we needed and wanted.And, imo other countries have to do the same.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> With all due respect for you & what your job is/was Jamie ( & think ALL our service men & women are brilliant) we all know that once the yanks decide to go in (& they will find a reason to do so at some point they *ALWAYS DO*), Camerons lips are glued to Obama's arse & we'll get dragged in there too, history repeated n all that !!!
> 
> If your saying the cost is nothing to do with NHS Student Fees & Poverty in the UK, seeing as this country is on it's knees just about & they *managed to find the money *to wade into someone elses conflict.
> 
> ...


that could be true of certain things, but not with Libya. Obama did not call for this


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

yeah but he's in there like a ferret down a hole! Like Bush he'll say one thing then turn round & do the exact opposite! then plead ignorance after wards or blame someone else!


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

the good news is this lot will not be voted in again :blink: we hope


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *But that is what our country fought previous wars for.Now as much as i hate the thought of living under a dictatorship we did fight for what we needed and wanted.And, imo other countries have to do the same.*


But we did not end up with that right of freedom by fighting alone. You only have to see what is happening across the Northern Africa and Middle East region to see that others want that freeedom that we take for granted. If they ask for help is it right we stand back and people die, get beaten etc etc???


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Would they do the same for us???? yes some would but you can bet just as many wouldnt want to know!

We arent exactly the most popular country in the world that is unless were taking them in feeding watering & keeping them that is then we are very popular!

Ok am off for a bit hounds need walked & are just about sitting on my head to attract my attention!!!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I don't want to upset any one, but I know some of you wont like it.

When someone joins the forces which ever branch they pick, they know what they are doing. It should not a surprise that someone is going to shoot at them and they may get badly injured or killed, that's what happens when you join up. You know that may happen and so does your family. So why on earth do we have to waste taxpayers money by having an inquest, surely it would be better spent on the injured. 

It also annoys me when they come cap in hand with letters pushed though the door asking for money. That's the government job, they are their employer, not us as an individual, we have already paid though our taxes.

Lots of people get injured and killed at work, so why are they so different, after all it was their own idea to join up.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

I think you will find we originally fought for the right to freedom on our own during the English Civil War in 1639 to 1641 when the last absolute ruler of this country, King Charles I was overthrown after many bloody battles between Cavaliers and Roundheads were fought. He was later beheaded for his abuse of power and sometime later Parliament and democratic government was established. The monarchy was invited back to act merely as a figurehead with no real power to speak of. This war was fought for the English by the English with some foreign mercenaries thrown into the mix.

No other nation stepped in to help, we did it alone. Wars fought since the English Civil War, at least, wars fought in the 20th century have, for the most part, been fought in defence of other countries.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*


noogsy said:



the good news is this lot will not be voted in again :blink: we hope

Click to expand...

 lol sorry to say they thought that about Mag.Thatcher.



jamie1977 said:



But we did not end up with that right of freedom by fighting alone. You only have to see what is happening across the Northern Africa and Middle East region to see that others want that freeedom that we take for granted. If they ask for help is it right we stand back and people die, get beaten etc etc???

Click to expand...

We haven't ended up with hardly any of the rights our fore fathers fought for.They would turn in their graves if they could see this country today.*


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't want to upset any one, but I know some of you wont like it.
> 
> When someone joins the forces which ever branch they pick, they know what they are doing. It should not a surprise that someone is going to shoot at them and they may get badly injured or killed, that's what happens when you join up. You know that may happen and so does your family. So why on earth do we have to waste taxpayers money by having an inquest, surely it would be better spent on the injured.
> 
> ...


*And for those reasons i would never sign the papers for a son or daughter of mine to join up.If they were old enough to understand and agreed with what they were signing up to,then it would be their choice and not mine.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> So we are to treat you like God and have faith that what you say is true? If the information you say we should research is available in the wider world, show us where it is. After all, if it's in the public domain you are not breaking the Official Secrets Act because it is not a secret, surely? So if what we are saying is so stupid, prove it?


I am not asking to be treated like god. I am just pointing out my views some of which do come with experience of fighting for air power.

I was pointing out Libya is not worthy of fighting in just for oil. Any search on google etc will confirm that only 2% of the worlds oil comes from Libya.

This is not being led by the UK or USA, it is a French led operation hence them going in 1st and now having made the 1st shot in anger, with UN backing. It was also as a result of a request from the region.

The UN has certain areas of responsibility, especially when it is one of their own members who are killing their own people just for expressing rights which we take for granted in this country. And Libya as a member is openly abusing what it signed up to when it became a UN member.

Regarding the cost the MOD has it's own budget, all be it a recently reduced one. So no money is taken from other budgets i.e Health and Education. To reduce that MOD budget further to increase other budgets (i.e health and education) would effect our military who are already under enough pressure as I personally am aware as are those of you who are related to current service personal, but lack of kit etc is another thread. Increasing the MOD budget would of course have knock on affects to other budgets.

This operation will indeed be expensive, estimates put it into the billions. This will be paid for from the military budgets of every country taking part, and will not be taken from other departments budgets. Though there is also a suggestion that the whole thing will be paid for by seized assets contacted to Gaddafi. I believe assets seized so far globally reach £32 billion. Despite the vast amounts of money connected to this action, it is the cheaper version compared to sending in ground troops both in time, lifes lost and money.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> Would they do the same for us???? yes some would but you can bet just as many wouldnt want to know!
> 
> We arent exactly the most popular country in the world that is unless were taking them in feeding watering & keeping them that is then we are very popular!
> 
> Ok am off for a bit hounds need walked & are just about sitting on my head to attract my attention!!!


That is an interesting question would Libya do the same if it was the other way around, i.e what was happening there was happening here. I would like to think they would in some ways but doubt it would be in the same manner.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't want to upset any one, but I know some of you wont like it.
> 
> When someone joins the forces which ever branch they pick, they know what they are doing. It should not a surprise that someone is going to shoot at them and they may get badly injured or killed, that's what happens when you join up. You know that may happen and so does your family. So why on earth do we have to waste taxpayers money by having an inquest, surely it would be better spent on the injured.
> 
> ...


I agree the government should do the paying of things that currently charities such as H4H,RBL,Afghan Heroes and Combat Stress etc do. Also compensation should be higher for injured personnel etc but that is another thread 

I do alot with H4H how have raised over £80 million, not one penny from the government. The same can be said for all the other forces charities. Of course the charities are thankful of the public donating but is it really our duty to pay for "Kev" to have access to things which the government should pay for. But as said that could be another thread


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't want to upset any one, but I know some of you wont like it.
> 
> When someone joins the forces which ever branch they pick, they know what they are doing. It should not a surprise that someone is going to shoot at them and they may get badly injured or killed, that's what happens when you join up. You know that may happen and so does your family. So why on earth do we have to waste taxpayers money by having an inquest, surely it would be better spent on the injured.
> 
> ...


I would be mortified if my boys wanted to sign up, i think our government is way to quick to jump on the bandwagon to someones 'aid' were gonna go in there all guns blazing and end up still there years after.
I think the brittish government should get their heads from up their arses and realise that this country is going down the pan and needs sorting out before cutting the funds of the military and invading bloody lybia!

Would lybia do the same for us.... im sure they would if it was in their interest to do so...if we were the ones sat on the oil:mad5:


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

: Libya is not having this action taken due to oil.

We in the UK produce more of the worlds oil than they do. So if oil was the reason than the world would be more justified in invading us than Libya :lol:


Top Ten Oil Producing Countries
1. Saudi Arabia &#8230; 11 million barrels per day (13.9% of estimated world total)

2. Russia &#8230; 9.9 million bpd (12.5%)

3. United States &#8230; 8.3 million bpd (10.5%)

4. Iran &#8230; 4.2 million bpd (5.3%)

5. Mexico &#8230; 3.8 million bpd (4.8%)

6. China &#8230; 3.7 million bpd (4.7%)

7. Canada &#8230; 3.1 million bpd (3.9%)

8. Norway &#8230; 3 million bpd (3.8%)

9. Venezuela &#8230; 2.8 million bpd (3.6%)

10. Kuwait &#8230; 2.7 million bpd (3.4%).

11. United Arab Emirates &#8230; 2.5 million barrels per day (3.2% of estimated world total)

12. Nigeria &#8230; 2.4 million bpd (3.1%)

13. Iraq &#8230; 2.11 million bpd (2.7%)

14. Algeria &#8230; 2.1 million bpd (2.6%)

15. United Kingdom &#8230; 1.9 million bpd (2.4%)

16. Libya &#8230; 1.7 million bpd (2.2%)


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

The Money may be coming out of the defense budget but the defense budget is a) made up out of British taxpayers money, b) there for the defense of Britain and the British people and, c) not limitless.

What happens if most of the defense budget has been squandered on fighting another country's battles and then we suddenly find ourselves under an unanticipated attack as we did with the Falklands in the 80s? What do you think the government is going to do for money? I'll tell you what they will do, they'll look for financial resources by reducing budgets or increase our taxes.

If the government has money to squander on fighting another country's civil war, they have no excuse for sending our soldier's out to fight with inadequate kit. You claim the costs could potentially be recovered from Libya, so not only do we interfere in something which is none of our business but we wade in and plunder them as well.

If France wants to jump in and play hero, let them. There are a lot of countries who are part of the UN, not all of them jump in with sending troops at the first sign of unrest. We practically trip over our own feet to get in there at the first sign of smoke.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> The Money may be coming out of the defense budget but the defense budget is a) made up out of British taxpayers money, b) there for the defense of Britain and the British people and, c) not limitless.
> 
> What happens if most of the defense budget has been squandered on fighting another country's battles and then we suddenly find ourselves under an unanticipated attack as we did with the Falklands in the 80s? What do you think the government is going to do for money? I'll tell you what they will do, they'll look for financial resources by reducing budgets or increase our taxes.
> 
> ...


We are not exactly rushing in, all this started 3-4 weeks ago. And since that point, steps have been in place, some of which is in the public domain and most of which is not. And as a member of the UN (like Libya) and as a member of NATO we have a duty to do what we are doing, even the countries who used their right to veto during the vote are (on the whole) still playing their part all be it a much smaller part.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't want to upset any one, but I know some of you wont like it.
> 
> When someone joins the forces which ever branch they pick, they know what they are doing. It should not a surprise that someone is going to shoot at them and they may get badly injured or killed, that's what happens when you join up. You know that may happen and so does your family. So why on earth do we have to waste taxpayers money by having an inquest, surely it would be better spent on the injured.
> 
> ...


I wonder if you would feel so hostile if our troops were on your street protecting you and your family


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

harley bear said:


> I would be mortified if my boys wanted to sign up, i think our government is way to quick to jump on the bandwagon to someones 'aid' were gonna go in there all guns blazing and end up still there years after.
> I think the brittish government should get their heads from up their arses and realise that this country is going down the pan and needs sorting out before cutting the funds of the military and invading bloody lybia!
> 
> Would lybia do the same for us.... im sure they would if it was in their interest to do so...if we were the ones sat on the oil:mad5:


My son signed up and i am VERY PROUD OF HIM, as i was during my husbands 22 yrs service
You never know one day it could be MY son protecting you and your family


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> We are not exactly rushing in, all this started 3-4 weeks ago. And since that point, steps have been in place, some of which is in the public domain and most of which is not. And as a member of the UN (like Libya) and as a member of NATO we have a duty to do what we are doing, even the countries who used their right to veto during the vote are (on the whole) still playing their part all be it a much smaller part.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain the UN gave Bush approval to invade Iraq in 2003 because Iraq broke 18 of the 22 UN resolutions in addition to the 9/11 attack on New York and yet countries like France, who were very vocal in their negative view of this decision, did not step in and help. In fact, many of the UN countries did not step in and help and have since condemned both the USA and UK for their actions.

If these countries can refuse to take part in a war in which they have no faith, despite the UN giving approval, why is it the UK do not have this same choice? A vote should be taken from the public and if we, the people of this country, do not want our taxes spent on fighting a civil war taking place in another part of the world, we should have the right to stop that action.

I have lost count of the number of times I have heard people from other countries, who disapprove of the actions the USA and the UK took against Iraq, condemn us for this. You can bet you bottom dollar, this will turn into yet another fiasco just like the last one.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

off topic but i would highly reccommend someone joining the forces. It is a good life, you meet great people not to mention free dental, free presciptions etc (reduced rail travel, which I abused to the max lol). Do not have to worry about a roof over your head. Not many jobs come with the "extras" of a life in the military, plus the fairly good starting pay of £18,000 with quickly rises to over £20,000. Yes all that does come with the threat of being sent anywhere in the world, often at short notice. I had 24hrs notice that I was going to Iraq 

My proudest day will always be standing around a corner waiting for the band to start playing then marching out in front of my family in April 2000 for my Passing Out Parade.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain the UN gave Bush approval to invade Iraq in 2003 because Iraq broke 18 of the 22 UN resolutions in addition to the 9/11 attack on New York and yet countries like France, who were very vocal in their negative view of this decision, did not step in and help. In fact, many of the UN countries did not step in and help and have since condemned both the USA and UK for their actions.
> 
> If these countries can refuse to take part in a war in which they have no faith, despite the UN giving approval, why is it the UK do not have this same choice? A vote should be taken from the public and if we, the people of this country, do not want our taxes spent on fighting a civil war taking place in another part of the world, we should have the right to stop that action.
> 
> I have lost count of the number of times I have heard people from other countries, who disapprove of the actions the USA and the UK took against Iraq, condemn us for this. You can bet you bottom dollar, this will turn into yet another fiasco just like the last one.


Think you are right with your UN and Iraq comments. But this is totally different and has more backing from the UN as a whole.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

hazel pritchard said:


> My son signed up and i am VERY PROUD OF HIM, as i was during my husbands 22 yrs service
> You never know one day it could be MY son protecting you and your family


I just wouldnt want my sons in the army, nothing wrong with that.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

hazel pritchard said:


> I wonder if you would feel so hostile if our troops were on your street protecting you and your family


*I think that comment was uncalled for.Anyone that joins the forces in "peace time" should know what they are letting their selves in for.The fire service and the like are the same.*


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> off topic but i would highly reccommend someone joining the forces. It is a good life, you meet great people not to mention free dental, free presciptions etc (reduced rail travel, which I abused to the max lol). Do not have to worry about a roof over your head. Not many jobs come with the "extras" of a life in the military, plus the fairly good starting pay of £18,000 with quickly rises to over £20,000. Yes all that does come with the threat of being sent anywhere in the world, often at short notice. I had 24hrs notice that I was going to Iraq
> 
> My proudest day will always be standing around a corner waiting for the band to start playing then marching out in front of my family in April 2000 for my Passing Out Parade.


*I'm sure some of the people serving this country would NOT find those reasons for putting their lives on the line top of their list.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *I'm sure some of the people serving this country would NOT find those reasons for putting their lives on the line top of their list.*


I know of many who do or did.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I think that comment was uncalled for.Anyone that joins the forces in "peace time" should know what they are letting their selves in for.The fire service and the like are the same.*


I completely agree with you.

They are joining up "now" and they know they will be fighting for another country and what they are letting themselves in for.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> I know of many who do or did.


*Then i' sorry to say, those people are no better than those on the dole looking for handouts.And i don't believe its the mojority.
*


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

*Suicide in the Trenches*

I knew a simple soldier boy
Who grinned at life in empty joy,
Slept soundly through the lonesome dark,
And whistled early with the lark.

In winter trenches, cowed and glum,
With crumps and lice and lack of rum,
He put a bullet through his brain.
No one spoke of him again.

You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye
Who cheer when soldier lads march by,
Sneak home and pray you'll never know
The hell where youth and laughter go.
_
Siegfried Sassoon_

*Disabled*

He sat in a wheeled chair, waiting for dark,
And shivered in his ghastly suit of grey,
Legless, sewn short at elbow.....

About this time Town used to swing so gay.....
In the old times, before he threw away his knees.....

One time he liked a blood-smear down his leg,
After the matches, carried shoulder-high.
It was after football, when he'd drunk a peg,
He though he'd better join. - He wonders why....

He asked to join. He didn't have to beg;
Smiling they wrote his lie; aged nineteen years.
Germans he scarcely thought of; all their guilt,
And Austria's, did not move him. And no fears
Of Fear came yet. He thought of jewelled hilts
For daggers in plaid socks; of smart salutes;
And care of arms; and leave; and pay arrears;
Esprit de corps; and hints for young recruits.
And soon, he was drafted out with drums and cheers.

Some cheered him home, but not as crowds cheer Goal.
Only a solemn man who brought him fruits
_Thanked_ him; and then inquired about his soul........

_Wilfred Owen_


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *Then i' sorry to say, those people are no better than those on the dole looking for handouts.And i don't believe its the mojority.
> *


Not sure if you have misunderstood me or you are just being silly.  (Hopefully you misunderstood me)

I meant the life you get in the forces is really good and is the reason many people join up. Nobody joins just to go to war. Just as someone does not join the fire service just to stand in a burning house.

If you did not misunderstand me than I thank you for saying I am now in the position mentally etc I am, just because I wanted to get free dental care and cheap housing.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> Think you are right with your UN and Iraq comments. But this is totally different and has more backing from the UN as a whole.


I don't think it matters how much backing this action has from the UN, we should still have the right to refuse to take part, as other countries have had the right and put into practice in the past. In my opinion, it is not our duty to simply go along with everything the UN consider lawful. If the majority of people in a country object to allowing their troops to participate, then those views should be respected and this and every other government we have ever had does not show respect for our views.

Which brings us full circle to the original post by Onyxx that the British government is too ready and willing to jump into any conflict that presents itself. It may have been three weeks since this started, but Cameron was ready to go at any point in that three weeks.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

another difference between this and other areas we are involved with - this is not a war or conflict


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> another difference between this and other areas we are involved with - this is not a war or conflict


But it might turn into one.


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

If Maggie had been in power in the last few weeks of the first Gulf war instead of John Major, our forces would have continued to Bagdhad and deposed Saddam.(Her words not mine) 
In which case the second Gulf war might not have happened.Bush senior and John Major bowed to the wishes of the Arab countries who just wanted Iraq out of Kuwait...which was easily achieved with 'Desert Storm' ....but left Saddam in power.

To my mind and Maggies this would have been like halting our armies at the Rhine and leaving Hitler in power.
As it happens in WW2 we did halt our armies but only to allow the Russians to continue into Berlin and finish the job.A decision made by the Supreme Commander Eisenhower, and not approved of by Monty and Churchill.

PS...Apart from this I couldn't stand the woman...


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> Not sure if you have misunderstood me or you are just being silly.  (Hopefully you misunderstood me)
> 
> I meant the life you get in the forces is really good and is the reason many people join up. Nobody joins just to go to war. Just as someone does not join the fire service just to stand in a burning house.
> 
> If you did not misunderstand me than I thank you for saying I am now in the position mentally etc I am, just because I wanted to get free dental care and cheap housing.


*Trust me i was not being silly and i only went by what you said.And if you think life in the forces is really good then thats fine by me,each to their own.
Your post has confused me.*


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

poohdog said:


> If Maggie had been in power in the last few weeks of the first Gulf war instead of John Major, our forces would have continued to Bagdhad and deposed Saddam.(Her words not mine)
> In which case the second Gulf war might not have happened.Bush senior and John Major bowed to the wishes of the Arab countries who just wanted Iraq out of Kuwait...which was easily achieved with 'Desert Storm' ....but left Saddam in power.
> 
> To my mind and Maggies this would have been like halting our armies at the Rhine and leaving Hitler in power.
> ...


*As i said in an earlier post,the SAS where in a position to take out Saddam but were told to stand down.This i know from someone who was involved.*


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

just my opinion of course...but every british service man/woman who goes into one of these warzones is one of our finest,it doesn't matter why they joined up....i couldn't do it yet these fine young people do.much respect to them all,they deserve it

people get confused sometimes,you can disagree with an action but still support our personnel who are seeing action,,,good luck to them all,lets hope this tyrant falls sooner rather than later


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

I'm sorry this thread has upset you Jamie but people are simply expressing their opinions which, unfortunately, do not accord with your own. Personally, I have the utmost respect for our forces. My uncle died in the Second World War and my own father was injured and traumatised. Both my cousin and my nephew were in the forces till retirement. It is precisely because members of my own family have served in the forces that I object to our government playing fast and loose with their lives.

Yes, we might think of ourselves as a caring nation but other countries see us as interfering busybodies who think we are better because we once had an empire. As someone has said, half the world hates us as it is probably for the reasons above and I for one am sick of it.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

I think there are two questions those who think the action of the UN is correct:

1 - If the basis of such action is 'democracy', who elected the UN representatives and who gave them permission to take the action they take?

2 - If the role of the UN is to stop regimes oppressing and suppressing their own people, what day do we start air strikes over Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, DRC, Djibouti, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE (for starters)?


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Not read the whole thread, but only one word....................OIL.


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

Elmo the Bear said:


> 2 - If the role of the UN is to stop regimes oppressing and suppressing their own people, what day do we start air strikes over Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, DRC, Djibouti, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE (for starters)?


are civilians in these countries facing a massacre while fighting for democracy?


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

skyblue said:


> are civilians in these countries facing a massacre while fighting for democracy?


Most of them have already been suppressed to the point where they cannot. Or do we wait for more of them to be tortured, raped, imprisoned or strike rich minerals before we help them? Are you really saying you have to reach a certain level of 'deaths' before the World Police will lend a hand?

Palestine is another example. We allow Israel to push the Palestinians to the point of starvation and then attack them with tanks when they get upset.... all funded by the US.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

skyblue said:


> are civilians in these countries facing a massacre while fighting for democracy?


They are guilty of many human rights abuses.


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

bird said:


> Not read the whole thread, but only one word....................OIL.


I totally agree


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> I think there are two questions those who think the action of the UN is correct:
> 
> 1 - If the basis of such action is 'democracy', who elected the UN representatives and who gave them permission to take the action they take?
> 
> 2 - If the role of the UN is to stop regimes oppressing and suppressing their own people, what day do we start air strikes over Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, DRC, Djibouti, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE (for starters)?


*Do you not think the UN is just a body that certain goverments use to hide behind? I can't ever remember being asked if i agree with the UN.*


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Sacremist said:


> They are guilty of many human rights abuses.


As are many countries, the problem with the west though, is the ability to pick and choose their fights, and the vast majority of fights that it is picking is those that will ultimately be of benefit to themselves, it has little to do with human rights and more to do with what resources that country has to offer. If it was purely down to human rights, do you really think that mugabe would still be in power, no he wouldnt, but then if oil had been discovered there the west would have swept in and removed him. 

As normal its our lads and lasses (forces) that have to do the governments dirty work. Bless em I'll always support them, but could quite happily spit in the faces of our government. Whichever political persuasion, because they're all as bad as the other.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Do you not think the UN is just a body that certain goverments use to hide behind? I can't ever remember being asked if i agree with the UN.*


Cameron states "we must enforce the will of the UN" but who are they. We did not elect anyone to the positions they hold and no are we asked our opinion. I think you're right... its easy for presidents and prime ministers to say "it was the UN what done it guv"


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

bird said:


> As are many countries, the problem with the west though, is the ability to pick and choose their fights, and the vast majority of fights that it is picking is those that will ultimately be of benefit to themselves, it has little to do with human rights and more to do with what resources that country has to offer. If it was purely down to human rights, do you really think that mugabe would still be in power, no he wouldnt, but then if oil had been discovered there the west would have swept in and removed him.
> 
> As normal its our lads and lasses (forces) that have to do the governments dirty work. Bless em I'll always support them, but could quite happily spit in the faces of our government. Whichever political persuasion, because they're all as bad as the other.


Absolutely. Our forces do a fantastic job and regardless of peace of war time it takes a lot of bottle to sign up whether you're a front line soldier or a cook... but... the organisation we appoint to oversee our forces is called the Ministry Of Defence... the clue is the last word.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

bird said:


> As are many countries, the problem with the west though, is the ability to pick and choose their fights, and the vast majority of fights that it is picking is those that will ultimately be of benefit to themselves, it has little to do with human rights and more to do with what resources that country has to offer. If it was purely down to human rights, do you really think that mugabe would still be in power, no he wouldnt, but then if oil had been discovered there the west would have swept in and removed him.
> 
> As normal its our lads and lasses (forces) that have to do the governments dirty work. Bless em I'll always support them, but could quite happily spit in the faces of our government. Whichever political persuasion, because they're all as bad as the other.


Hey! I agree with you. That's the whole point. If the criteria for taking up arms against a government of a country is there abuse of their citizen's human rights then we would now be using force against a dozen different nations, but we are not. This is against Libya alone so that raises the question why, what is so special about Libya?


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Im surprised Cameron is managing to say anything much seeing as his lips are glued ot obamas arse!!!

No one is out to upset anyone, we all ahve our own opinions to which we are entitled, we just have to agree to disagree sometimes 

My opinion strong as it may be remains the same Cameron shouldnt be playing god with out troups on a whim, far too many have died already in needless fighting of conflicts that have nothing to do with us.

Cameron just wants to prove himself & look good no matter what he does he's still a complete waste of time & in my eyes a total dick head!!!

The only difference between him & Maggie as I said before is that she had balls by the barrow load he hasnt any!!


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Sacremist said:


> what is so special about Libya?


*OIL* we need it they've got it.



0nyxx said:


> The only difference between him & Maggie as I said before is that she had balls by the barrow load he hasnt any!!


Maggie (love her or loathe her) had more balls than every pm that has followed her put together.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

UK missiles fired at Libyan targets - News - Virgin Media
It has all started there, 
How long before our troops will also be sent out there on the ground ?????


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

hazel pritchard said:


> UK missiles fired at Libyan targets - News - Virgin Media
> It has all started there,
> How long before our troops will also be sent out there on the ground ?????


Hazel I know this is what our sons train for but I am getting very uneasy!


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

yes i agree, my son is packed for a tour of Afghan but im not convinced thats where he will end up


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

bird said:


> *OIL* we need it they've got it.
> 
> Maggie (love her or loathe her) had more balls than every pm that has followed her put together.


She had the balls to make countless poor decisions that ruined this country beyond repair. Maybe she should have been castrated early on (its a shame the Libyans didn't come and save us from her)


----------



## whigfield (Mar 19, 2011)

My husband is in the RAF and we're based at RAF Coningsby where he works on the Typhoons and Tornados so there's a possiblity he may have to go.

Don't agree with this decision. If it's about supporting people, then there are plenty of other countries (say, in Africa) that could use some sorting out but conveniently, they don't have oil..... 

Not to mention Mr Moonface has just decimated the forces with cuts and now wants to overstretch us further. Pfffffff!


----------



## Tanya1989 (Dec 4, 2009)

Just closing this for a little while, may reopen, just need to catch up as something has been brought to my attention


----------



## Tanya1989 (Dec 4, 2009)

Re opened :smile:


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I've been watching the news unfold and i have to say i don't like whats going on and i find it all very worrying.
We have gone from having a no fly zone being put into place to the possabilty of outing Gaddafi. This smells of another Iraq sittuation to me.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Hazel & northnsouth, your sons are both very brave, but all this uncertainty must be awful for you both sending you both ((((((((((megga hugs))))))))) ladies 

Well the military action started last night  as I knew it would obviously the feelings & opinions of the thousands of people all over the world not just here who didnt want anther conflict count for nothing!

But in opinion Camerons shot himself in the foot come the next election (& that can't come soon enough) he'll be history!

I can't help thinking that they ask for help when it's convenient for them, any other time they wouldnt piss on us if we were on fire, & if the boot was on the other foot they'd leave us too it rather than help, yeah the usual countries would but libya & many of the countries in that regions would turn a blind eye!

I agree with you Janice it's going exactly the same way as Iraq & Afghanistam even tho cameron was bleating oh it's not another Iraq the mans a feking idiot, shouldnt be in charge of a troupe of bloody monekys let alone the UK


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

'Unfortunately, due to this (action), marine and air targets, whether military or civilian, will be exposed to real danger in the Mediterranean, since the area of the Mediterranean and North Africa has become a battleground because of this blatant military aggression,' said Colonel Gaddafi.

He also called on the Libyan people to resist the coalition forces and added: 'It is now necessary to open the stores and arm all the masses with all types of weapons to defend the independence, unity and honour of Libya".
Colonel Gaddafi vows to fight in 'Mediterranean battleground' | Metro.co.uk


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Thye dont call him mad dog gaddafi for nothing he's a feking nutter! he has no respect for life & will kill anyone in his way civilian or otherwise you can also bet his terrorist fanatics are ready to go, I hope Cameron is pleased with himself!!!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> Thye dont call him mad dog gaddafi for nothing he's a feking nutter! he has no respect for life & will kill anyone in his way civilian or otherwise you can also bet his terrorist fanatics are ready to go, I hope Cameron is pleased with himself!!!


*I've just been saying the very same thing to my hubby.God forbid it does happen,but i can see bombings in this country like we did with the IRA.
As you say,the sooner Cameron is out the better.*


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Does anyone else have this sinking feeling that's this is not going to end well

This country is stretched to breaking point both financially and emotionally and every day there is more pressure not just with our own economic affairs but with all the problems around the world.

What with wars and conflict, natural disasters and the problems with third world countries there seems to be very little to smile about these days.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> Does anyone else have this sinking feeling that's this is not going to end well
> 
> This country is stretched to breaking point both financially and emotionally and every day there is more pressure not just with our own economic affairs but with all the problems around the world.
> 
> What with wars and conflict, natural disasters and the problems with third world countries there seems to be very little to smile about these days.


*I honestly think we have taken on something that should have been left to the Libyian people to sort out for themselves.
We are hardly hearing nothing about the people in Japan now.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

As I've said before they should be concentrating on supporting helping & improving our own country & it's people instead of nebbing where they aren't wanted or needed.

There is appalling poverty in this country much of whish is brushed under the carpet, this should be Camerons priority not playing war games with Obama & the rest of them, when he over spends on this little venture he'll end up making further cuts in other areas!

He's penalising those on low income & benefits & gobshitting about this that and the other yet, companies, factorys & other employers are folding left right & centre, he's making cuts in the Army Navy Air Force & Police Force even in the Fire Services & the NHS & god knws where else.

Then saying people need to be off benefits & working when there arent ENOUGH feking jobs to go round anyway!!!!

Can we not just drop him right in the middle of Libya & find someone who will make the UK & it's fine people theyre MAIN PRIORITY, Camerons a toffee nosed arse kissing yuppie who wouldnt know what hardship was if it smacked him between they eyes!!!

God Bless ALL our brave soliders ours are the best in the world

We didnt want or need another conflict but this feking idiot has dragged us unwillingly into one!!!!
You can bet amny areas in the Uk will now be on heightened alert for terrorist attacks!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> *I honestly think we have taken on something that should have been left to the Libyian people to sort out for themselves.
> *


EXACTLY!!

But, everyone has got to know...this has nothing to do with saving the Libyan people.
If anyone heard Mrs. Clinton's speech today and how many times she mentioned STRATEGIC POSITIONING in the region...then take into account the oil and natural resource grabbing war going on between the US and allies vs Russia and China...it becomes painfully clear what all this is about.

The no fly zone they are establishing is conveniently right along the corridor with all the oil rigs....that the rebels are/were trying to control....rebels that are friendly to US btw.
France has already recognized the REBELS as the legitimate govt of Libya...while others in the coalition are at least thinking on it a bit longer.

It's the same old story dressed in different back drop and sold to the public as a positive thing.

This is a sovereign nation we're talking about. Who are we to step in and stop the gov't from squelching rebels?

What if it was done in the UK or the US? 
What if rebels rose and took over national resources and the gov't started bombing to control it?

Wouldn't there be an uproar over outside nations telling our gov'ts what they can and can't do to control our situation?


----------



## Inca's Mum (Apr 9, 2009)

Quite worried about this but don't understand it all considering I'm only 14 but just the fact of this all is worrying me because my dad is in the RAF and I don't want him being sent anywhere. Gadaffi is a lunatic, just put Sky News on and it says that he has said he will distribute weapons to over a million civilians, what the hell!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Inca's Mum said:


> Quite worried about this but don't understand it all considering *I'm only 14* but just the fact of this all is worrying me because my dad is in the RAF and I don't want him being sent anywhere. Gadaffi is a lunatic, just put Sky News on and it says that he has said he will distribute weapons to over a million civilians, what the hell!


Life lesson number one...do NOT trust main stream media to give you ANYTHING other than the party line and tell you what you need to hear so you'll back your gov't.

Research...cross check....verify.

Go to outside sources and DIG for the truth.

Make connections with past actions to present ones.....you may be surprised to find that what channel (fill in the blank) news is telling you isn't the ENTIRE picture..



Btw...god bless your father and watch over him...hopefully he won't see ANY action.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Inca's Mum said:


> Quite worried about this but don't understand it all considering I'm only 14 but just the fact of this all is worrying me because my dad is in the RAF and I don't want him being sent anywhere. Gadaffi is a lunatic, just put Sky News on and it says that he has said he will distribute weapons to over a million civilians, what the hell!


*Gadaffi might be a lunatic,but so are those that have started all this.I feel there is far more on behind closed doors than what we will get to know.
My thoughts are with your dad and all of our service men and women.*


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

Can I please just ask all of you to remember that whilst there is conflict in many parts which British Forces are involved in please be aware of any upset that could be caused to any ex-service member, serving member and any parents or children of members serving in areas of conflict !! 

Many of you will know that I am married to an ex-serviceman Post Traumatic Stress is not an easy thing to live with, please think, type and re-read before posting anything especially if you think it could be that trigger to upset someone 

Grateful thanks 

Tashi x


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

tashi said:


> Can I please just ask all of you to remember that whilst there is conflict in many parts which British Forces are involved in please be aware of any upset that could be caused to any ex-service member, serving member and any parents or children of members serving in areas of conflict !!
> 
> Many of you will know that I am married to an ex-serviceman Post Traumatic Stress is not an easy thing to live with, please think, type and re-read before posting anything especially if you think it could be that trigger to upset someone
> 
> ...


I'm sure no-one is blaming or saying anything against current or ex servicemen. We all have the deepest respect, I'm certain, for all they do. If anything, it is only the government with whom people are upset and are, in fact, concerned for all our boys and girls who are sent to fight in these places because of our governments actions.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Bandy said:


> Life lesson number one...do NOT trust main stream media to give you ANYTHING other than the party line and tell you what you need to hear so you'll back your gov't.
> 
> Research...cross check....verify.
> 
> ...


Here, here to all of that and if you want to get a good idea of the truth.....

... I'd leave Sky News well alone...they don't like truth getting in the way of a good story


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Sacremist said:


> I'm sure no-one is blaming or saying anything against current or ex servicemen. We all have the deepest respect, I'm certain, for all they do. If anything, it is only the government with whom people are upset and are, in fact, concerned for all our boys and girls who are sent to fight in these places because of our governments actions.


Absolutely, but by the very nature of the services its not the people doing the job that make the decisions.

I think (to paraphrase) the saying in World War One was "Lions led by donkeys". I quite like donkeys so I wouldn't say Cameron was one of those but if anyone can come up with a good comparison I'll go with that..


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Absolutely, but by the very nature of the services its not the people doing the job that make the decisions.
> 
> I think (to paraphrase) the saying in World War One was "Lions led by donkeys". I quite like donkeys so I wouldn't say Cameron was one of those but if anyone can come up with a good comparison I'll go with that..


*How about an ass, or should i say arse?*


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

I won't comment on this thread other than to say God Bless all our Service Men and Women may they be safe...Jill


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Remember Michael Moore the American investigative journalist and his anti gun programme...'Bowling for Columbine'?

He asked how many members of the House of Representatives (453 and 100 in the Senate) had family members that were at war in Iraq...

The answer!......*1 *

I wonder how many kids of our lot??


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> I said we shouldn't get involved in the *politics* of a country, I never said that we should *never* help when it comes to* natural* *disasters*, people who need help when the planet turns against them *(there but for the grace of god go I)* need our help, and I'm willing to help.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> I said we shouldn't get involved in the *politics* of a country, I never said that we should *never* help when it comes to* natural* *disasters*, people who need help when the planet turns against them *(there but for the grace of god go I)* need our help, and I'm willing to help.


I agree and also don't think its about cost, more about "us" Lording it over the rest of the world assuming our system is superior.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Why is it that those that are FOR us blasting ANOTHER country to bits to "save the poor people from oppression" aren't saying something about going into...I dunno...Sierra Leone?

Where is the international outrage at the thousands being killed, mutilated, raped and tortured by regimes in that area?


Why isn't there outrage over the atrocities in N Korea?
Are the starving and tortured people THERE less important?

Why isn't there an international coalition bombing China for how they mistreat their people?

Hmm...

Could it be because there is no strategic advantage? No resources to plunder?

Nah...it must be because THEIR plight as a people is less important than the people in oil rich areas that urgently need our help.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

Poohdog,

No kids but a nephew and a cousin of mine fought in Iraq. However this thread is not about our countryfolk who fight in the wars but the jackasses who send them there in the first place so I don't really understand the point of your statement. 

Are you comparing the people having a political discussion on here with the US senate who were responsible for sending American soldiers to Iraq? 

If so, in what way do you think we are responsible?

If this is not your point, then are you suggesting that by disagreeing with what our government is doing, in some perverse way suggests we are also against the good men and women who serve in our forces?

If so, how have you come to this conclusion? It seems a weird way to see things?

I would appreciate it very much if you could clarify the above statement more clearly because in isolation, it makes no sense in the context of what has been discussed so far on this thread.


----------



## Guest (Mar 20, 2011)

Said as soon as this all kicked off that muppet in charge would see us end up in Libya . Would just like to send good wishes to all aboard HMS Westminster...its my nieces ship...shes currently at home on maternity leave but her OH is still aboard...


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Sacremist said:


> Poohdog,
> 
> No kids but a nephew and a cousin of mine fought in Iraq. However this thread is not about our countryfolk who fight in the wars but the jackasses who send them there in the first place so I don't really understand the point of your statement.
> 
> ...


I could be wrong here...I have that aptitude..

but, I took his post as meaning it's easy for those in power to enter conflicts where the potential for loss of life is high...when they, themselves, have no one to lose.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

poohdog said:


> I wonder how many kids of our lot??


Thanks for that Bandy. It was this line above that threw me'. When he said our lot, I thought he meant us on this thread. I can see what you mean now. Sorry Poohdog!


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

jon bda said:


> Said as soon as this all kicked off that muppet in charge would see us end up in Libya . Would just like to send good wishes to all aboard HMS Westminster...its my nieces ship...shes currently at home on maternity leave but her OH is still aboard...


I hope and pray he is home soon
xxxx


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> I agree and also don't think its about cost, more about "us" Lording it over the rest of the world assuming our system is superior.


Well said, we aren't a shinning example are we, with "Bill & Ben" running the country.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

harley bear said:


> I totally agree.... BUT he was voted in...


Not properly he wasn't. He needed the ib dems.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Burrowzig said:


> Not properly he wasn't. He needed the ib dems.


So true, what would we do without Bill and Ben at No. 10 :cursing: :scared: :yikes:


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> Well said, we aren't a shinning example are we, with "Bill & Ben" running the country.


My fond childhood memories of Bill & Ben shattered with a single keystroke :cryin:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> My fond childhood memories of Bill & Ben shattered with a single keystroke :cryin:
> .
> .
> .
> ...


I'm sorry,:blushing: I loved them as well, not sure who the Weed would be though.:biggrin:


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> I'm sorry,:blushing: I loved them as well, not sure who the Weed would be though.:biggrin:


Chancellor of the Exchequor?


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Sacremist said:


> Thanks for that Bandy. It was this line above that threw me'. When he said our lot, I thought he meant us on this thread. I can see what you mean now. Sorry Poohdog!


I should have put...how many of our politicians have kids fighting in wars.

Bit of a cock up on the word front...

I don't recall Mark Thatcher or Euan Blair marching off to Mommys' and Daddies' war...too busy travelling the world making a fast buck.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

yeah maybe if they had close family members in the armed forces they wouldnt be so fast to commit ours to every flare up anywhere in the world!!!!


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

0nyxx said:


> yeah maybe if they had close family members in the armed forces they wouldnt be so fast to commit ours to every flare up anywhere in the world!!!!


Exactly... My neice is pregnant and worried waiting for news off her Fiance who is currently serving on HMS Westminster. Can only contact her when their bosses say it's ok and then it's through their bosses accounts  So everything she knows she is seeing on the news


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> yeah maybe if they had close family members in the armed forces they wouldnt be so fast to commit ours to every flare up anywhere in the world!!!!


 A high percentage of UK MP's from all parties have either served in the military or have close family in the military. This is not including any connection to World War 2, where obviously more MP's would have a connection.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

I was referring to David Cameron & is close cronies, WW2 wasnt mentioned nor were more wide ranging MP's many of whom didnt agree with the decision anyway!! Cameron is the one who gave the go ahead even though he knew there was a lot of people not happy about a 3rd conflict !

Im sorry if my point of view offends you in anyway jamie, but I wear my heart on my sleeve & thats the way I am, & Im not backward about saying what I think or feel but dont intentionally upset anyone!


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Italy has now joined the conflict! I think this is another conflict that will drag on through fanatics & snipers & bombers, Gaddafi's compound is surrounded by loyalists & fanatics in other words civilians which will prevent any further air strike on his compound.

He probably couldnt give a toss about those surrounding his compound as long as he himslef id relatively safe!

He can still give orders & be comparitively safe himself!!!!


----------



## michaelasi (Oct 29, 2009)

watch out for budget this week, lets see how many more cuts would do...do u know guys on saturday is a big union rally in london? apparently would be over 600 couches bringing up to 100 000 people , also they would come by train and car as well , 100 000 is confirmed what is going to be on top of that god knows . all the cops leaves had been canceled . I do not think the muppets had choose the best week to go to war . 
ah just been announced RAF forces had aborted a mission because there had been seen civilians who protect the key points .


----------



## michaelasi (Oct 29, 2009)

UN humanitarian crisis , was not this created by the UN it self ? they say thousands of life's r at risk well why r we getting involved in to a war . 

u know until last weekend Cameroon could be proud of one thing comparing with his predecessors . His hands were not stained with blood . Now is up there on front . 

and one more thing . IF UK is Bankrupt , WHERE THE HECK R COMING THE MONEY FOR THIS WAR . 


Ah I forgot , we cut the pensions , we stop child benefits , we will going to cut specialist wards from NHS hospital ie , reduced the amount of hospitals who operate heart conditions for children ... yes from there the money r coming for this war


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

michaelasi said:


> UN humanitarian crisis , was not this created by the UN it self ? they say thousands of life's r at risk well why r we getting involved in to a war .
> 
> u know until last weekend Cameroon could be proud of one thing comparing with his predecessors . His hands were not stained with blood . Now is up there on front .
> 
> ...


*Ah you see apparently this isn't a war (yet). They have dressed it all up so it appears like we are trying to help the people of Libya.
As for where the money is coming from,they will feed us the same old rubbish that they have money set aside for this sort of thing.Having said that,they will/have told us we are cutting the defence budget.
I'm afraid you have to pick through the lies and bull they feed us and come to your own conclusion.*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

with my MP's with close connections to the military, I meant ones close to the PM as well as the wider circle.

I am far from pro - war (I have witnessed events 1st hand). I just do not agree with the points raised for the anti war debate. Most can be ruled out through research. I feel too many people go on what they read in newspapers or see on Sky News etc.

Research oil production from Libya, it can not be soon ruled out as a reason.
Research Tory and Lib Dem members who have connections to the military in recent times.
Research who is paying a huge chunk of the cost etc. Even if the cost is not taken from seized Gaddafi assets.
Read UN Resolution 1973 (all of it)
Research what is going on in other countries, where people have commented "Why Libya not "so and so"?". Just because it's not on the news does not mean it is not going on. You would be foolish to just think our troops are only in the air above Libya and in Afghanistan at present.
Research how decisions to deploy UK troops are made, you will see the PM actually only plays a small part. The PM is just seen as the public face of decisions.
Research the part the UK-France Defence Co-operation Treaty plays.
And finely speak to my Libyan friend about factors not mentioned on any news channel etc.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> with my MP's with close connections to the military, I meant ones close to the PM as well as the wider circle.
> 
> I am far from pro - war (I have witnessed events 1st hand). I just do not agree with the points raised for the anti war debate. Most can be ruled out through research. I feel too many people go on what they read in newspapers or see on Sky News etc.
> 
> ...


*For myself i don't think we know or will ever know the ins and outs of why these things happen.We only get to hear the crap they wish to feed us as i've said before.
But i believe we all have the right to voice our fears and oppinions on what we do see.And in this case of Libya i think more lives are going to be lost than had we kept out of it.Its just my oppinion though.*


----------



## michaelasi (Oct 29, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> *Ah you see apparently this isn't a war (yet). They have dressed it all up so it appears like we are trying to help the people of Libya.
> As for where the money is coming from,they will feed us the same old rubbish that they have money set aside for this sort of thing.Having said that,they will/have told us we are cutting the defence budget.
> I'm afraid you have to pick through the lies and bull they feed us and come to your own conclusion.*


ay they had a charity set up aside and they manage to collect £1 from each one of us over the past 20 years and they make lots and lots of money for this sort of conflicts

What is going to be interesting now is to see how long is going to take to se here and there inexplicable bombs with in european territory . I never believed 9/11 to be true and let alone events from London couple years ago, in p[articular in London when just few days before was the G20 meeting and Bush popularity was going down , then we had the Olympics announcement and we had a pool of people in central of London and the LIve8 with hundreds thousands of people , why this terrorists had chosen to explode tubes and busses in a very quiet and ordinary day? Looked to me it need it to be a reminder of 9/11 for us here .
STINKY STINKY STINKY

Oh by the way u know guys in Bahrein there is all this unrest and people losing there lives . Back In my birth Country , romania is nothing at the news about bahrein , I told mum and dad a few more friends of what is going on there , 
Ah why r we not attacking the bahrain gov ? of course we do not do it , is not one of the TAX HEAVENS FOR the Bilderberg? heheh

can;t wait the may elections


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

what ever they want to call it when two sides are attacking one another it's a bloody war! From the news earlier the SAS are on the ground in there already (which is probably the same as any other conflict) BUT they said no one was going on on the ground!!!

I am however glad one mission was aborted because of civilian's in the area, they may be loyalists & fanatics but they are still civilian, they are brought up to believe that the western/outside world is evil & the their rulers in this case Gaddafi is all wise all powerful!, Many never question that & believe wholey that the crap they are fed is the honest truth, the brave ones doe question it & often die because of this!


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Ok have removed some posts and references that were not constructive to this thread. 
Its an interesting debate/chat folks, lets not get sidetracked onto other things.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

There are other reasons this latest conflict has people worried we like many others live with in 10 miles of a large nuclear plant which has been targeted before by terrorists who luckily were caught in the planning stages before they even got to this area!

Gaddafi has no regard for life you only have to look up Pan Am 103 at Lockerbie to know that, he also praised 9/11 though that was kept quiet for quite a long time!

He'll have loyalists already living/working over here & in the USA France Italy etc etc, Cameron should be really pleased with himself shouldnt he!!!!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> There are other reasons this latest conflict has people worried we like many others live with in 10 miles of a large nuclear plant which has been targeted before by terrorists who luckily were caught in the planning stages before they even got to this area!
> 
> Gaddafi has no regard for life you only have to look up Pan Am 103 at Lockerbie to know that, he also praised 9/11 though that was kept quiet for quite a long time!
> 
> He'll have loyalists already living/working over here & in the USA France Italy etc etc, Cameron should be really pleased with himself shouldnt he!!!!


Apparently he was also responsible for backing the IRA.As for him and the *Lockerbie bombing,if my memory serves me well he was responsible for a lot more than that.Hijacking planes was the thing a few years back.But we still sold weapons to the "mad man".Now what does that say about our goverment/s.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Your right on that one weapons were all so sold to regimes in africa & afghanistan & Iraq too can't remember the name of the programme I watched but it was there as clear as day condemn them one minute sell them the ammo they need the next!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> Your right on that one weapons were all so sold to regimes in africa & afghanistan & Iraq too can't remember the name of the programme I watched but it was there as clear as day condemn them one minute sell them the ammo they need the next!


*They imo are lying to us already.If you listen to the different politiions they have gone from a no fly zone and not their intentions to taking out Gaddafi,to no its a possibility they will.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

I'd say that was the plan all along they just kept it quiet until now, they may take him out but his loyalists will cause a lot of problems as they wont take to a new regime without a fight!

Gaddafi should have been removed from power in 1988 after lockerbie if that was the intention not 23 yrs later! using a conflict thats nothing to do with us as an excuse!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*This makes for interesting reading.Now if you scroll down to where it says "in power", imo thats history repeating itself when we "could" have taken out Saddam,but the SAS were told to stand down.
Muammar Gaddafi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

thats what I was referring to there was a man on the news who used to be a top military man & he was saying that if they'd had their way Gaddafi would have been removed from power back then.
The SAS are on the ground in Libya now!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> thats what I was referring to there was a man on the news who used to be a top military man & he was saying that if they'd had their way Gaddafi would have been removed from power back then.
> The SAS are on the ground in Libya now!


*lol Sorry,thats what happens when i get passionate about something.
I thought the SAS were in there last week? and were caught but then set free.They went to Malta i believe there were 8 of them.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

It has been mentioned on numerous occasions now not just on Uk news but on other news progs that SAS are on the ground in Libya, 

As you point out we are entitled to our own opinions, & no disrespect meant thats what were doing, we just dont necessarily agree with yours.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*This report states the SAS which are a British force ARE in Libya.
SAS using lasers to guide missiles on to key targets | News*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

With the greatest respect, no one posting on a pet forum could have inside knowledge from a C&C point of view; if they did, they would not even hint that they did. It may be the case that normal procedures are x or y but each conflict has its own structure.

There were troops on the ground in Libya not two weeks ago extraditing civilians. 

There are many leaders around the world who have done far worse than Gadaffi and we do not have a duty to launch an attack on a country's air defences; the sense of duty goes back to believing our way of life is superior to anyone else's.

The Lord's Resistance Army have been murdering, raping and generally running amok in Uganda and the border area for years; the UK did have a response but it was to train a few soldiers and little else.

We supported and supplied the resistance and the occupation (by USSR) of Afghanistan. The US supplied weapons (including chemical) to some nice chap to fend off the Iranians (he eventually used it on the Kurds).
n the Kurds).


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

I do think that debate on this issue has its merits, this does not mean that I don't understand Jamie. I'm sure its very hard watching this with your experience. Maybe you could stay on the forum and just stay away from this particular thread. I am positive that no one on here, this thread, is trying to cause you any inner turmoil. If you have any PMs you wish to forward you can forward them to a mod or report the pm and it will be sent automatically... Hoping all our men and women serving all our country's are safe....Jill


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

re opened after another mods editing bless them....


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

Thread re opened.. Please stay on topic.. 


Many Thanks Hayley. xxx


----------



## michaelasi (Oct 29, 2009)

wow , now this is what I call cleanup , oh and I am not ironic at all


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

Thank you for reopening the thread and I agree, lets all try and stay on topic and not keep going off at a tangent.


----------



## frosty2010 (Apr 2, 2010)

Out of curiousity does anyone know the fuel cost alone for a single fighter jet which is being deployed in libya? and how many are being deployed 


How does this compare to savings the government are making on laying off police officers and lolly pop men/woman? 

I wreckon these rediculious cut backs are more than likely costing us less than the libyian war i say the libian war because its nothing to do with us and we shouldnt be there. Russia and china voted to stay out of it why does cameron think that we want to be in it? i thought it was suppose to be a democrecy so we should get more say in what goes on im afraid its not our country anymore


----------



## DogLover1981 (Mar 28, 2009)

I was surprised by how rapidly the UN and USA got involved in the fighting in Libya. I have mixed feelings about US involvement though. What do the rebels want? Hopefully they want a more democratic government. If they don't want democracy than another ruthless dictator will end up in power. Even so, it may not be good to have an unstable country in the middle of civil war so close to Europe. The rapid approval by the UN may have been partly because of all the oil in Libya. They are trying to end the fighting to lower oil prices. Another reason why alternative fuels/energy need to be researched and implemented more.

I think the point I'm making is this isn't such a simple issue.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

frosty2010 said:


> Out of curiousity does anyone know the fuel cost alone for a single fighter jet which is being deployed in libya? and how many are being deployed
> 
> How does this compare to savings the government are making on laying off police officers and lolly pop men/woman?
> 
> I wreckon these rediculious cut backs are more than likely costing us less than the libyian war i say the libian war because its nothing to do with us and we shouldnt be there. Russia and china voted to stay out of it why does cameron think that we want to be in it? i thought it was suppose to be a democrecy so we should get more say in what goes on im afraid its not our country anymore


Oddly enough, the EJ200 (the engine in Typhoon) is one of the most fuel efficient jet engines... not sure we could argue that the bombing is low carbon though !


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Now your baseline iv cruise is not fuel efficient and about $500k a chuck. Not sure the Libyan people will care about that though.


----------



## frosty2010 (Apr 2, 2010)

I suppose it doesnt matter to the government as i bet they dont pay duty on their fuel like we do lmao.......


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

dont know about these jet fighters but I do know that air craft fuel is very expensive a friend who works at BA told me some time ago a gounded plain looses over £1000 a day slightly off topic sorry.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

They are closing our local police station. A lot of people are being made redundant. The nearest police station to where I live is now over 20 miles away and yet they try and justify spending all that money on a situation that is none of our business.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

theyre closing our fire station & making the men redundant, nearest one will be approx 4 miles away not far you might think but every second counts with a fire.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Decided to stay but that is another thread  so please do not comment on it here.

To answer the cost of a RAF Tornado. It costs £21000 per hour to keep a tornado airbourne. This is cheaper than some military aircraft. And would be the same cost whether that Tornado was doing training or carrying out operational duties. The extra cost comes with the ammo which can go into millions. 

Not sure why they are doing runs from Norfolk to Libya and back, which would take 8 hours or so. They are soon moving to Italy once undertaking a patrol status. Not sure of their reasoning behind the 3000 mile trip.

But either way the Americans are forking out loads to fly B2's from the states, overhead Libya and back again. Think that is a round trip of 10,000 miles. Not sure of the cost of a B2 per hour.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

My cousins son was posted to Afghanistan for his next tour of duty he left home today but im not sure if he flew out today or is going tomorrow, she's really down bless her, keeping my fingers n toes crossed for his safe return in a few months time.

All of our service men & women do a brilliant job sometimes in the worst of conditions too  God bless n keep them all safe


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*


JANICE199 said:



This report states the SAS which are a British force ARE in Libya.
SAS using lasers to guide missiles on to key targets | News

Click to expand...

Jamie can you reply to this please?*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *
> 
> Jamie can you reply to this please?*


Will read it now. But just remember I may be restricted on what I can share of my knowledge etc.


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

Surely if we do have forces like the SAS in Libya (and I do not know one way or the other) it would be silly of us to admit the fact and irresponsible of any news agency to report it.


----------



## frosty2010 (Apr 2, 2010)

Just read this:

Prof Charmers says the cost of a single cruise missile is about £500,000, while a single Tornado sortie was about £30,000 - in fuel alone.

Every Tomahawk cruise missile fired from a submarine costs around £500,000 If a Tornado was downed, and had to be replaced, it would cost the Treasury upwards of £50m, he warned.

and:

"If the war goes on for a relatively limited time - weeks rather than months - then we're talking about relatively small sums - at least compared to Afghanistan, which costs £4bn a year," (small sums a few hundread mill per month :S)

Full story on BBC News HERE

*
It is unlikely that the military action in Libya will have an impact on the Ministry of Defence's (MoD) budget because operations like this are normally funded from the Treasury's reserve.*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

I think they do them buy one get one free??

MINDEF - News - Factsheet - Laser Target Marker (LTM 91) (18 Nov 07)


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> I think they do them buy one get one free??
> 
> MINDEF - News - Factsheet - Laser Target Marker (LTM 91) (18 Nov 07)


*Damn! Now ytou would think they would have the common sence to fit thosed to the planes,wouldn't you?*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *
> 
> Jamie can you reply to this please?*


That story does not have much facts in it.

Some operations do require the SAS to do such jobs. Although there are specailly trained people known as Forward Air Controllers. These are the people who do this job day to day so to speak. they are part of the RAF Regiment and are to the RAF what the Royal Marines are to the Navy. They have often been mistaken for the SAS, especially by the media.

That aside neither the RAF Regt or the SAS are carrying out this task in Libya. Indeed you can operate operations without FAC's if you have good coverage from UAV's aka Drones and top cover from aircraft such as the E3D


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

I thought FAC or JTAC were there to coordinate close air support?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Elmo the Bear said:


> I thought FAC or JTAC were there to coordinate close air support?


They are as part of their remit.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

But there's nothing to support?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Like I said they are not in Libya. But one of their jobs is to highlight with lasers, targets for either air or sea launched attacks. They share this job with the SAS at times. Both can also carry out verbal calling in of aircraft.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Damn! Now ytou would think they would have the common sence to fit thosed to the planes,wouldn't you?*


Nowhere to balance the tripod.... obviously


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

I am watching panarama on BBC1 about Libya, in my view this programme is ,the BBC/Goverment trying to brainwash the people of the UK into thinking it is right to send our forces out to Libya.


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

hazel pritchard said:


> I am watching panarama on BBC1 about Libya, in my view this programme is ,the BBC/Goverment trying to brainwash the people of the UK into thinking it is right to send our forces out to Libya.


Do they think we are that guilable?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Modern aircraft do have the facility to self guide missiles to target. No tripods needed  This cuts out the risk of a person on the ground being spotted. I am sure you can guess the risk of hiding but running the risk of being spotted by shining a laser beam.

Edit - This was in response to the previous page. 2 people posted in the space of me typing it out lol


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

What has a modern aircraft got to do with the original post??

*When David Cameron was trying to get to where he is now, he called Tony Blair worst than **** over military involement in Iraq & Afghanistan!

Now who's the one pushing for military action in Lybia (& has been from day 1) & is already commiting UK troups to Libya warning they could be in action within 24 hours?

So he's sending more of our lads over there to get involved in what will become another sniper war just like Iraq & Afghanistan, enough of ours have been killed over the last few years just send Cameron over he'll bore them all into submission with his inane gobshitting!!!

He wants too look important (wasnt that long since he was over there kissing Gadaffi's arse) He's to bloody quick to commit Uk troops he's playing with lives as if they dont count he's committed faster than Blair did Blair umm'd n arr'd about it for months Camerons in there within a matter of 3 weeks!!!!!!

They wont get rid of Gadaffi easily he has too many loyal fanatics, fanatics who wouldn't think twice about targeting terrorist attacks against the UK, Libya was responsible for worst terrorist atrocity the Uk has ever suffered the bombing of Pam Am flight 103 over lockerbie in 1988, & Cameron is antagonising him?????

This Idiot will bring England to it's knees in more ways than one & he's already got a good head start!!!*


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> Do they think we are that guilable?


Clearly they do!


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

momentofmadness said:


> What has a modern aircraft got to do with the original post??
> 
> *When David Cameron was trying to get to where he is now, he called Tony Blair worst than **** over military involement in Iraq & Afghanistan!
> 
> ...


I was answering a point raised by at least 2 members on the previous page. Sorry :


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

You can monitor the success of the airstrikes by watching the graph on the right...

CRUDE OIL PRICE: Oil | Energy | Petroleum | Oil Price | Crude Oil Charts | Oil Price Forecast


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

Happy Paws said:


> I said we shouldn't get involved in the *politics* of a country, I never said that we should *never* help when it comes to* natural* *disasters*, people who need help when the planet turns against them *(there but for the grace of god go I)* need our help, and I'm willing to help.


I know this is off topic, but as some of you may know I have family in Tokyo, the company I work for also has a large work force in Japan. I deal with them on a regular basis.Today we were sent a email from the company president in Japan. It was so uplifting to read about this proud nation. It was reported that not one single member of our work force lost thier life, possesions and homes but not family. While business is not being conducted at present there is a relif fund set up for each £/$ donated our global company will double it to go to the Japanese Red Cross.. Just though you may be interested...


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> I know this is off topic, but as some of you may know I have family in Tokyo, the company I work for also has a large work force in Japan. I deal with them on a regular basis.Today we were sent a email from the company president in Japan. It was so uplifting to read about this proud nation. It was reported that not one single member of our work force lost thier life, possesions and homes but not family. While business is not being conducted at present there is a relif fund set up for each £/$ donated our global company will double it to go to the Japanese Red Cross.. Just though you may be interested...


There has been many good stories coming out about how proud and helpful they have been as a nation. But we better stay on topic.


----------



## Guest (Mar 21, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> Do they think we are that guilable?


Yep! reckon they do! I do wonder why they ain't sent troops into Egypt! opps!!! heck!!! then I remember - there aint no oil in Eygpt!! is there?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Is is interesting (though do not know what the "Libyan Building" is)............

"The Libyan building by the UN in New York, which had continued to fly Gaddafi's Green flag throughout this uprising, has now replaced it with the rebel tri-colour flag. I can see it from my window"

This is not a quote from me, sadly i can not see New York from my window.


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> Is is interesting (though do not know what the "Libyan Building" is)............
> 
> "The Libyan building by the UN in New York, which had continued to fly Gaddafi's Green flag throughout this uprising, has now replaced it with the rebel tri-colour flag. I can see it from my window"
> 
> This is not a quote from me, sadly i can not see New York from my window.


picking the winner?


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

skyblue said:


> picking the winner?


Probably terrified the UN might decide they were an air defence site !


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> But either way the Americans are forking out loads to fly B2's from the states, overhead Libya and back again. Think that is a round trip of 10,000 miles. Not sure of the cost of a B2 per hour.


Approx $250,000 round trip per bomber...fuel alone.
Avg 25 hour flight...with 110 hours MAINTENANCE ...PER HOUR..of flight...and a climate controlled hanger...

its a lot


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Probably terrified the UN might decide they were an air defence site !


It seems the building is UN connected, think it's this - Permanent Mission of Libya Building. So not as interesting as I first thought.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Approx $250,000 round trip per bomber...fuel alone.
> Avg 25 hour flight...with 110 hours MAINTENANCE ...PER HOUR..of flight...and a climate controlled hanger...
> 
> its a lot


Wow knew they were expensive. That said (not sure they still do it) but a B2 used to fly over here for RIAT Airshow. Not land, just fly over from the states, fly over the show once then return to USA. It was flanked by 2 F15 or F16's. Not saying the cost of doing it for Libya is ok but shows both the UK and USA spend loads just for training or PR.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

The British parliament has voted overwhelmingly in favour of the military action in Libya - 557 MPs voted in favour and 13 against.

How many MP's do we have? Is that 570 everyone?Or have some not voted/turned up?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> The British parliament has voted overwhelmingly in favour of the military action in Libya - 557 MPs voted in favour and 13 against.
> 
> How many MP's do we have? Is that 570 everyone?Or have some not voted/turned up?


Found the answer there are about 650.


----------



## michaelasi (Oct 29, 2009)

some one was asking early one how much the petrol diesel would go up ... well the oil prices had gone up today , is that a surprise ? just been announced £1.40/l for diesel


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

so 570 out of 61,113,205 .....


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

michaelasi said:


> some one was asking early one how much the petrol diesel would go up ... well the oil prices had gone up today , is that a surprise ? just been announced £1.40/l for diesel


... that's the point..

CRUDE OIL PRICE: Oil | Energy | Petroleum | Oil Price | Crude Oil Charts | Oil Price Forecast


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Elmo the Bear said:


> so 570 out of 61,113,205 .....


Think it would be foolish to assume everyone else in the country has the the opposite view to those 570. But who knows what the figure would be if everyone was asked.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

That's the problem, we haven't been asked.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> That's the problem, we haven't been asked.


That's the problem. You, me or indeed anyone needs to be asked. Look at the long list of countries who said yes to the UN resolution. They did so without asking their citizens, same goes for the ones who said no, their citizens may of been for it etc.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

But no one even asked us if we wanted to be part of the UN... yet we feel obliged to bomb a country to impose what we call democracy.....


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

As much as I agree with the reasons of assiting in Libya, one thing does puzzle me.

(I believe there are plans to change it for the future). But why was the debate on Libya today, after our involvement had already started? What if votes came back the other way around i.e majority against?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Elmo the Bear said:


> But no one asked us if we wanted to be part of the UN... yet we feel obliged to bomb a country to impose what we call democracy.....


Sadly none (or least most) of us were around when the UN was formed


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

In fact i think we were a founding nation of the UN back in 1945.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

*US focuses on Libya, neglects abuses elsewhere*

TRENDS:
Arab world protests

TAGS: Conflict, UN, Africa, Politics, USA, Libya

Libya declared a cease-fire following a UN vote which authorized a no-fly zone and "all necessary measures" to prevent the government from attacking its people. However, the measure does nothing to address violence in Bahrain, Yemen or elsewhere. 

While the next few moves appear uncertain in Libya, recent US drone air strikes in Pakistan killed 40 civilians and at least 50 people were killed when Yemeni security forces opened fire on an anti-government protest following Muslim prayers.

In the Ivory Cost as many as 30 were also killed when armed men loyal to the nations incumbent leader, Laurent Gbagbo, shelled a marketplace in the nations commercial capital.

The United Nations called the abuses in Bahrain "shocking and illegal" but the US-backed regime continued to wage a violent crackdown against anti-government protesters unrestrained by foreign governments. 

Why has all the focus been on Libya when atrocities, some argued to be worse, have taken place elsewhere in the region.

Michel Chossudovsky, the director of the Center for Research on Globalization in Montréal, Canada said the system is full of double standards.

Theyve killed more than a million people in Iraq, they cant tell us theyre coming to the rescue of civilians. Its absolute nonsense, he said. 

The situation in Bahrain is very very serious, Chossudovsky added. There you have the [US Navy] Fifth Fleet and they didnt intervene, they just let it happen. 

He explained that Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, are a part of the general coalition that works with the west and is actively supported by the US. There is a rise in factions and the west uses these states as part of their coalition to handle the dirty work in the region.

What world public opinion must understand is we are on verge of a fourth war theater in North Africa, Chossudovsky argued. That means military intervention, and that means war and that means civilian casualties.

Killing in the name of......peace?
Makes absolutely no sense to me that other regions are ignored and those that are simply rich in oil are so apt to be "helped".

Wonder why that would be?

*We want civilians to be protected, not shelled  Arab League 
leader, Amr Moussa*

The Arab League has harshly criticized military actions by Western powers in Libya. The head of the organization, Amr Moussa, said international actions have gone beyond what the Arab League backed and are now causing civilian deaths.

Moussa told reporters Sunday that "what happened differs from the no-fly zone objectives and said what we want is civilians' protection not shelling more civilians."

In comments carried by Egypts official state news agency, Moussa also said he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting.

The Arab Leagues support for a no-fly zone provided crucial underpinning for the passage of the UN Security Council resolution that made possible the Western intervention, the biggest against an Arab country since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Political analyst Adil Shamoo says Amr Moussas comments should be taken very seriously, though he doubts that coalition forces will consider the criticism and review its operations.

Balkans expert Marko Gasic says that now that the cease-fire is needed for peace, that should be the aim of the mission. The mission has now become compromised, he says, and should be stopped as soon as possible.

"We should remember that the resolution calls for dialogue. It requires both sides in order to engage in that dialogue. So, it should not be about getting rid of Gaddafi. If it is, then this action on day one is already in breach of the resolution. We needed dialogue, we needed a cease-fire, we got bombs instead. The bombs are not necessary for peace."

:nono: :nono:


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

jamie1977 said:


> Sadly none (or least most) of us were around when the UN was formed


I think you are avoiding the issue. We (the UN) are the aggressor here, this is not a democracy; why do think many countries use the phrase 'imperialist' when they refer to the UK, US and large parts of Europe? That phrase doesn't come from the mouths of radicals or terrorists it comes from the people who populate these countries.

We simply assume that we are right, they are wrong and therefore everything we do is right. How many countries has Gadaffi attacked since he came to power 40 years ago ? and how many has the US attacked (many with our help)...?
China 1945-46 
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Belgian Congo 1964
Guatemala 1964
Dominican Republic 1965-66
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983-84
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1981-92
Nicaragua 1981-90
Libya 1986
Iran 1987-88
Libya 1989
Panama 1989-90
Iraq 1991-
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992-94
Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)
Bosnia 1995
Iran 1998 (airliner)
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001-
Libya 2011-


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Already made my points clear, not going to keep repeating them. If you have any direct questions/points I have not already answered I will gladly answer/respond.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> *US focuses on Libya, neglects abuses elsewhere*
> 
> TRENDS:
> Arab world protests
> ...


Amr Moussas comments were a result of poor translation. Though UAE seems to be changing it's mind on the role it will play.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> That's the problem. You, me or indeed anyone needs to be asked. Look at the long list of countries who said yes to the UN resolution. They did so without asking their citizens, same goes for the ones who said no, their citizens may of been for it etc.


It doesn't matter what other countries do or don't do, IMO, because not all other countries were involved in the Iraq debacle as we were. We already have a history of making bad decisions despite having UN approval to act. Once again, here we are with a government too willing to go to war just because the UN says it's okay. What really grates is the hypocrisy. If anything, we had more good reason to invade Iraq than Libya. Saddam did invade Kuwait during the first Iraq war which at least elevated that war to something other than internal politics. The second war was based, in part, on the resolutions imposed after that first war. I'm not denying that Gadaffi is a bad man and we would all be better off if he was gone, but even if we get rid of him, it will not stop his supporters who might escape capture.

There are no guarantees the rebels who take over will be any better than Gadaffi. You only have to read world history, the Russian Revolution springs to mind, to see that not all revolutions work out as planned.

All the ideology of the Russian Revolution, Lenin and Trotsky was subverted by the likes of tyrants such as Stalin. This same story has been repeated time and again the world over.

The only way we can guarantee a fair and democratic government at the end of all this is to stay put, keep our troops over there to ensure what we want from this is put into practice. Is any of this starting to sound familiar? This situation has the potential to be either another Russian Revolution or another Iraq. We keep making the same mistakes over and over.

So, no, maybe other countries did not ask their citizens but I believe our government should have asked us. They have no right to keep committing us to these wars.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

And the rebels we funded (and armed) to push the Russians out of Afghanistan .. now known as the Taliban..


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> Already made my points clear, not going to keep repeating them. If you have any direct questions/points I have not already answered I will gladly answer/respond.


So have we Jamie, but you are as unwilling to accept our viewpoint as we are to accept yours. Perhaps it would be easier all round if we just agree to disagree because we do seem to be going around in circles here.

At the end of the day, you are entitled to your opinion, but so are we.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> It doesn't matter what other countries do or don't do, IMO, because not all other countries were involved in the Iraq debacle as we were. We already have a history of making bad decisions despite having UN approval to act. Once again, here we are with a government too willing to go to war just because the UN says it's okay. What really grates is the hypocrisy. If anything, we had more good reason to invade Iraq than Libya. Saddam did invade Kuwait during the first Iraq war which at least elevated that war to something other than internal politics. The second war was based, in part, on the resolutions imposed after that first war. I'm not denying that Gadaffi is a bad man and we would all be better off if he was gone, but even if we get rid of him, it will not stop his supporters who might escape capture.
> 
> There are no guarantees the rebels who take over will be any better than Gadaffi. You only have to read world history, the Russian Revolution springs to mind, to see that not all revolutions work out as planned.
> 
> ...


It would be the ideal solution to have a crystal ball. But sadly we do not. We could not do anything, and it sorts itself, though it could also get worse. We could get involved, and things get better, or get worse.

The news channels/ UK MP's (think it was Liam Fox) make the public view worse by saying comments that could give the impression that our aim is to take out Gadaffi. When I do not think it is, not directly in any case. More a "if he happens to be at such and such site when we bomb then bonus".

And this is not a war, it is imposing a No Fly Zone, which does involve taking out sites such as the ones taken out so far.

Despite the differences from Iraq, it is common that you will get people comparing this to the No Fly Zone in Iraq, which lasted 12 years (I think). That is understandable, but UN Resolution 1973 makes sure that Libya can not turn into an Iraq. Lots of countries (many of which are not playing a part to be fair) agreed to the restrictions imposed by UN Resolution 1973, and if any of the main 3 of France, UK or USA tried to change things i.e put "boots on the ground" then many of it's current supporters would quickly change sides.

The only thing not really covered by UN Resolution 1973 is a clear "end-game"


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

Very true.. no point in rubbing the letters off your keys trying to get your points across over and over again..


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Elmo the Bear said:


> And the rebels we funded (and armed) to push the Russians out of Afghanistan .. now known as the Taliban..


And the Army officer who went through Sandhurst in the UK, and was sold weapons by us is now ruling Libya :tongue_smilie:


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> So have we Jamie, but you are as unwilling to accept our viewpoint as we are to accept yours. Perhaps it would be easier all round if we just agree to disagree because we do seem to be going around in circles here.
> 
> At the end of the day, you are entitled to your opinion, but so are we.


I share your view on the whole just disagree with some of the evidence used to aid your (not personally but as a collective) points. When looking through facts regarding oil and the connections our MP's have to the military etc, will show I am highlighting facts.

Again I am not a human google so go find the info yourself :lol: and maybe that is not doing myself any favours but why should I do your work for you?


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> Amr Moussas comments were a result of poor translation. Though UAE seems to be changing it's mind on the role it will play.


Link?

////////////////////////////


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Link?
> 
> ////////////////////////////


Will do your work/search for you this once :lol:


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

This is one link - FT.com / Middle East & North Africa - Arab League reiterate support for Libya action

Will see if I can find one that states what caused the confusion in his comments on Sunday.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

The Q&A bit here mentions a mis-translation William Hague refuses to say if dictator is target of coalition's air strikes | News


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> And the Army officer who went through Sandhurst in the UK, and was sold weapons by us is now ruling Libya :tongue_smilie:


Odd, isn't it...how some of the most evil rulers were backed, funded and/or armed by the good guys who are now saving their people from them?

When are people going to open their eyes to the duplicity of our leaders?


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> I share your view on the whole just disagree with some of the evidence used to aid your (not personally but as a collective) points. When looking through facts regarding oil and the connections our MP's have to the military etc, will show I am highlighting facts.
> 
> Again I am not a human google so go find the info yourself :lol: and maybe that is not doing myself any favours but why should I do your work for you?


I'm afraid I disagree that you are highlighting facts, I think you are hiding behind Official Secrets Act far too much and the facts you state may be available by googling them but you are making the mistake of assuming that what you have googled is 100% fact.

I think this is the reason why some of this discussion has been so heated at times is because you frequently make the assumption that you are speaking fact and the rest of us are not. Unfortunately, you have on mire than one occasion been very patronising with regard to other people's viewpoint. You have assumed a superiority based on evidence which the rest of us do not see as proof.

Maybe if you stopped speaking to people as you have been, we might be more willing to listen. This is not an attack on you, merely an observation of what I can only describe as a very unfortunate attitude which rubs people up the wrong way.

I will openly admit I do not know everything and I have learned a lot from this thread. I do wonder how much you have learned?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy has there beenn a vote among your politians on Libya similair to what we had today in the UK?


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> The Q&A bit here mentions a mis-translation William Hague refuses to say if dictator is target of coalition's air strikes | News


That's kinda humorous...

After Cameron called him, it was a mistranslation.

Incidentally, that's the only publication that holds that position.
At least, of all the one's I've read, that's the only one that says it was a mistranslation.

I wonder...what did he _really_ say?

He was just _mildly_ upset that bombings were killing civilians?


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> Bandy has there beenn a vote among your politians on Libya similair to what we had today in the UK?


Not to my knowledge.

What was the vote that England had?

The only vote I know of was the UN vote.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> I'm afraid I disagree that you are highlighting facts, I think you are hiding behind Official Secrets Act far too much and the facts you state may be available by googling them but you are making the mistake of assuming that what you have googled is 100% fact.
> 
> I think this is the reason why some of this discussion has been so heated at times is because you frequently make the assumption that you are speaking fact and the rest of us are not. Unfortunately, you have on mire than one occasion been very patronising with regard to other people's viewpoint. You have assumed a superiority based on evidence which the rest of us do not see as proof.
> 
> ...


Except I have not googled anything that i have mentioned (except those 2 links above for Bandy and proof of how low down in the worlds oil Libya is). I have hardly used the OFS, so you feel you need clarification on something then unless i have said it already I will happily give a response.

There is for obvious reasons details of how the RAF operate I can not share. But I will gladly share what I can. If you read most of my posts I was highlighting the disagreement that people were saying our MP's have no connection to the military of recent times and of the oil connection. I am not pro war (as mentioned I have been there, got the t shirt), but I am wise enough to know that sometimes there is a reason to do something however small etc.

To be fair you do not know what I do, all you know is I am ex RAF. But that on it's own has gained me some info as well as tours with servicemen with connections to the house of commons (and Buckingham Palace, but that is off topic slightly), so I know that our MP's do have some family involvement.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Not to my knowledge.
> 
> What was the vote that England had?
> 
> The only vote I know of was the UN vote.


It was really a debate about Libya (most MP's agreed it was right to do what we did). There was then a vote at the end,I posted the numbers earlier. As I said earlier I find it weird that it was done after we had already got involved. So just wondered if there had been anything similar over there.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> That's kinda humorous...
> 
> After Cameron called him, it was a mistranslation.
> 
> ...


Did find a Australian link saying the same. Either way he confirmed their stance in a meeting with Ban Ki Moon on Monday. Like I said earlier UAE seem to be changing their mind though. They started off saying they would provide aircraft but have now said no aircraft, just aid.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> It was really a debate about Libya (most MP's agreed it was right to do what we did). There was then a vote at the end,I posted the numbers earlier. As I said earlier I find it weird that it was done after we had already got involved. So just wondered if there had been anything similar over there.


Nah, if they did take a vote, it'd be 6 months before they got around to it.

But, on another note...regardless of your views on how far down the list Libya's oil is...you have to recognize the strategic importance of the region.

Given the hostilities with Iran, the threats made by them if an invasion was made...it has to make you take notice the areas where all the ...uprisings....have taken place.

Here's another point to ponder...did you pay any attention to the flags of the ...protesters in Egypt?

Looked remarkably similar to those in Serbia..

both of which, by the way, were funded by the US...

thank you wikileaks..


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Nah, if they did take a vote, it'd be 6 months before they got around to it.
> 
> But, on another note...regardless of your views on how far down the list Libya's oil is...you have to recognize the strategic importance of the region.
> 
> ...


Did not notice, sorry if being thick but explain how flags are funded by the US or indeed what flags they were.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> To be fair you do not know what I do, all you know is I am ex RAF. But that on it's own has gained me some info as well as tours with servicemen with connections to the house of commons (and Buckingham Palace, but that is off topic slightly), so I know that our MP's do have some family involvement.


True, we don't know what your jib was in the RAF and of course, knowing that may or may not sway our opinion. However, I think it highly unlikely, unless there was evidence that Gadaffi and Libya were a threat to our own country and its people and the news reports stating the actions were to help the people of Libya were all lies.

However, if this were the case, why would our government lie? They have to know that launching an attack on another country for reasons such as protecting its citizens from a dictatorship is less likely to gain public support than telling us it is because Libya is a threat to national security?

Tony Blair's reasons may have proved to be inaccurate but at the time they were more convincing.

I do understand the general public cannot be made privy to every bit of secret intelligence but if the reasons we have been given are false, as I feel you are implying, then they could have come up with something better.

What I don't understand with you, though, is if you are retired, how can you possibly know anymore than anyone else? You must be able to see why we find it hard to take you seriously?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> True, we don't know what your jib was in the RAF and of course, knowing that may or may not sway our opinion. However, I think it highly unlikely, unless there was evidence that Gadaffi and Libya were a threat to our own country and its people and the news reports stating the actions were to help the people of Libya were all lies.
> 
> However, if this were the case, why would our government lie? They have to know that launching an attack on another country for reasons such as protecting its citizens from a dictatorship is less likely to gain public support than telling us it is because Libya is a threat to national security?
> 
> ...


I do understand, and saying I am retired makes me sound old :lol:
I have left the RAF is all I am saying, and no I am not an agent :lol:


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Hate these polls etc because they do not ask everyone, in fact not sure who they ask cos I never see requests for my opinion  Then again do not watch much TV :lol:

But....

_Only one in three people in the UK agree it is right for Britain to take military action against Col Gaddafi's forces in Libya, according to a ComRes/ITN poll. It found that 43% of those surveyed disagreed with the action taken by the UK government and 22% were unsure._

Would be helpful to know how many people were asked/responded.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

Gaddafi is using human shields including mothers with their infants. I tell you, there are alot of sick fourcars out there.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

morsel said:


> Gaddafi is using human shields including mothers with their infants. I tell you, there are alot of sick fourcars out there.


He even makes people "support" him by kidnapping and torturing their families, so in essence blackmailing them to go out and support him.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

I really don't see how the British government could avoid taking some action, since it armed him in the first place.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

morsel said:


> I really don't see how the British government could avoid taking some action, since it armed him in the first place.


Can see your thinking


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

well yet again it seems there have been some sly moves pulled regarding the attacks on Libya, some of the countries agreed to a no fly zone only & not to Targets air strikes & now the removal of Gaddafi, & their opinions are now being voiced as well as questions & disagreements Russia & Germany are stiil against it Obamas back tacking.

But WHERE is the EEJIT Cameron right in the front still gobbing & now begining to look underhand & as we already knew & down right STUPID!!!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> well yet again it seems there have been some sly moves pulled regarding the attacks on Libya, some of the countries agreed to a no fly zone only & not to Targets air strikes & now the removal of Gaddafi, & their opinions are now being voiced as well as questions & disagreements Russia & Germany are stiil against it Obamas back tacking.
> 
> But WHERE is the EEJIT Cameron right in the front still gobbing & now begining to look underhand & as we already knew & down right STUPID!!!


*Back on the 8th March Cameron said in this clip that Gaddafi "has to go"..I wonder how they intended to do that without force.
BBC News - David Cameron says Gaddafi &#039;has got to go&#039;
I've said all along there was more to this than meets the eye.Never trust a politician.*


----------



## Amethyst (Jun 16, 2010)

I have made a conscious decision not to watch this, why get ourselves so irate and upset about something we can do nothing about


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Amethyst said:


> I have made a conscious decision not to watch this, why get ourselves so irate and upset about something we can do nothing about


*Usualy i don't bother much with the news,but this is not only too close to home imo but i think we are in for some terrible times in this country.I hope to god i'm wrong.*


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Amethyst said:


> I have made a conscious decision not to watch this, why get ourselves so irate and upset about something we can do nothing about


I can fully understand your train of thought here.  All I can say is, Question Time this week is going to be very interesting.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> Did not notice, sorry if being thick but explain how flags are funded by the US or indeed what flags they were.


Must have been a _mistranslation_....

the flags aren't funded mate...the people who are trained to protest and cause civil unrest and disharmony are though.

It's not a secret how these things work. It very well was supposed to be but thanks to documents leaked by wikileaks and reported on by various papers, it isn't anymore.

The flag looks like this....if that's what you're asking.










When I have more time, we can get deeper into it if you'd like.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Must have been a _mistranslation_....
> 
> the flags aren't funded mate...the people who are trained to protest and cause civil unrest and disharmony are though.
> 
> ...


Do not watch much TV, so had not seen them. What does the fist/flag represent?


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *Back on the 8th March Cameron said in this clip that Gaddafi "has to go"..I wonder how they intended to do that without force.
> BBC News - David Cameron says Gaddafi 'has got to go'
> I've said all along there was more to this than meets the eye.Never trust a politician.*


Does not have to be force from us or our allies. Even though it is a risky move they are going for the approach of assisting the rebels overthrow the regime.


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

Amethyst said:


> I have made a conscious decision not to watch this, why get ourselves so irate and upset about something we can do nothing about


Think I'm going to join you on that one.


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

US fighter plane crashes in Libya - UK News - MSN News UK


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> US fighter plane crashes in Libya - *UK News - MSN News UK


Thankfully ended with a happy ending. Fingers crossed that it does not happen again.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Had mum all day so havent had chance to catch up on anything on the news yet will do shortly NEED a very big cuppa 1st


----------



## Amethyst (Jun 16, 2010)

0nyxx said:


> Had mum all day so havent had chance to catch up on anything on the news yet will do shortly NEED a very big cuppa 1st


It sounds as if you are almost enjoying all this ...


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

No! I'm gonna enjoy my cuppa thats what the smiley face was for, been up since 6am & havent had a cuppa or anything to eat yet & been dealing with my mum who has advanced Alzhiemers all day 

But Im not enjoying whats going in in Libya that doesnt mean I dont watch the news to see whats happening not just in Libya but in Japan too.

Why would I enjoy our idiotic government & the waste of space that is David cameron sending our troups in on a whim to look good himself?????


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> When David Cameron was trying to get to where he is now, he called Tony Blair worst than **** over military involement in Iraq & Afghanistan!
> 
> Now who's the one pushing for military action in Lybia (& has been from day 1) & is already commiting UK troups to Libya warning they could be in action within 24 hours?
> 
> ...


from what i heard from his speech, he's not putting troops in to take over like in afghan and surrounding. We are helping (merely helping i should add) the rebels (or lets face it the PEOPLE of libya) to overthrow the man trying to OFF THEM ALL. This is not overtly the same as afghan etc as we are basically trying to stop the eejit in charge from murdering his people any more. we are deploying mostly air support, ground support will be to augment the 'rebels' ONCE they are in charge, we won't be putting troops in to take down an unknown number of insurgents as that is not the problem in libya, it's getting gidaffi out of the way so a proper election and gov the people want.

the UN (remfs that they have become) and US are in this with us and are singing from the same sheet this time.

once gidaffis out we probably won't be there for long. considering we've not even put in carriers (not that we have many left) and are doing LD bombing, shows that its predominantly for a short time, and we have not (as of yet, yet to be seen) promised long term help.

it's a sit back and see situation from what we can gather.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

well hopefully there will be enough of them to over throw Gaddafi & his army, the poor sods havent got the weaponry or the training the solidiers have, also hopefully whats been said will be adhered too & our troupes dont end up as targets again like they have in Iraq & Afghanistan.

We dont need to be involved an another conflict let alone a long drawn out one like the other 2!

Im still very uneasy about the terrorist threat though he's not called mad dog Gaddafi for nothing, he's an evil sod with no regard for human life or the suffering that his actions might cause, he's well known for being a supporter of terrorism over the years.

he'll stop at nothing to hit back at those who are against him, he'll use any means at his disposal most likely his loyalists & fanatics!


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Guess the past does make it harder for people to trust our politicians


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Back on the 8th March Cameron said in this clip that Gaddafi "has to go"..I wonder how they intended to do that without force.
> BBC News - David Cameron says Gaddafi 'has got to go'
> I've said all along there was more to this than meets the eye.Never trust a politician.*


Its right though, we have a duty to get rid of unelected dictators who oppress their people and threaten the security of the world..........

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.... but what do we do about Gadaffi?


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2011)

Libya: Operation Odyssey Dawn >> TotallyCoolPix

Some lovely photos of it...


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Yeah but Gaddafi's been there 40+ years always been a threat sat pretty (as in left alone) over Lockerbie now they decide to take him out when he's doing the same as he's done now for all that time, but no one wants their finger prints on who's idea it was! They want Nato to take control so no 1 country is named even though France & England supported by the USA were in there 1st!


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

So the UN say they have wiped out the majority of Libya's air defences and hundreds of vehicles.

The contracts for resupply (new air defences and military vehicles) are doubtless already being bid on by the usual companies and will be paid for with Libyan oil money (in the same way Iraqi oil money is financing the rebuilding of Iraq after we destroyed it).

But who will defend Libya if another country decides to attack them now?


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

I'd say the Nato coalition would have to after all they are the ones who left the country unable to defend itself???


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Its right though, we have a duty to get rid of unelected dictators who oppress their people and threaten the security of the world..........
> 
> .
> .
> ...


*You see i don't see it like that.Don't get me wrong what Gadaffi is doing and has been doing for years is dreadfull but i don't think its up to us or anyone to get involved.Lets face it,we did'nt help them by selling them the weapons in the first place knowing full well what he was like.
Now what if some country decided that they want to sort this country for being responsible for arming Gadaffi? Would we agree to that?*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *You see i don't see it like that.Don't get me wrong what Gadaffi is doing and has been doing for years is dreadfull but i don't think its up to us or anyone to get involved.Lets face it,we did'nt help them by selling them the weapons in the first place knowing full well what he was like.
> Now what if some country decided that they want to sort this country for being responsible for arming Gadaffi? Would we agree to that?*


Sorry I was being ironic (unelected dictator=Cameron) etc etc


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *You see i don't see it like that.Don't get me wrong what Gadaffi is doing and has been doing for years is dreadfull but i don't think its up to us or anyone to get involved.Lets face it,we did'nt help them by selling them the weapons in the first place knowing full well what he was like.
> Now what if some country decided that they want to sort this country for being responsible for arming Gadaffi? Would we agree to that?*


See your point but he also got arms from Russia, Belguim, Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain. Most selling more than us to him. (There is most probably other countries as well)


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Brazil has as well, plus the Czechs and Romania.

The EU sells Libya £340 million per year in arms


----------



## bullet (Jan 25, 2009)

I see its costing us £2million a day just to put aircraft and missiles in the air, i'm glad we're having to cut back on essential services so we can pay for it. I would hate to see this goverment recklessly spending my hard earned cash:blink:


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

bullet said:


> I see its costing us £2million a day just to put aircraft and missiles in the air, i'm glad we're having to cut back on essential services so we can pay for it. I would hate to see this goverment recklessly spending my hard earned cash:blink:


They've already given _your_ cash to the banks.... this is your kids cash they're spending.


----------



## bullet (Jan 25, 2009)

Elmo the Bear said:


> They've already given _your_ cash to the banks.... this is your kids cash they're spending.


That'll please the kids then, they wanted a kinnect


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Yes it is alot of money but it still costs nearly just as much for the same aircraft to do their daily training and operational duties here in the UK.


----------



## bullet (Jan 25, 2009)

jamie1977 said:


> Yes it is alot of money but it still costs nearly just as much for the same aircraft to do their daily training and operational duties here in the UK.


But what i cant understand is cameron was so intent to make sure this country got its books in order, then commits our hard pressed forces to even more strain, there has to be a breaking point, either we defend every putapon people in god knows how many countries, or bankrupt this country


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

Elmo the Bear said:


> They've already given _your_ cash to the banks.... this is your kids cash they're spending.


And my pension..... glad I can have the luxury of working until 70 +... then I can sell my house, (thanks maggie for that at least) , to pay for a bed in a nursing home...


----------



## Sacrechat (Feb 27, 2011)

jamie1977 said:


> Yes it is alot of money but it still costs nearly just as much for the same aircraft to do their daily training and operational duties here in the UK.


I hate it when the training aircraft fly over the countryside like the Lake District. Destroys the peace and quiet.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

bullet said:


> But what i cant understand is cameron was so intent to make sure this country got its books in order, then commits our hard pressed forces to even more strain, there has to be a breaking point, either we defend every putapon people in god knows how many countries, or bankrupt this country


I see your point, but the government do withold a extremely large amount of money for "a rainy day", but the cost of this should not even need to dip into that. That is unless this action of course our involvement for some reason goes on for a extremely long time. There is also a suggestion the Arab League is paying a huge chunk of the cost (not sure if that is true), plus the possibility as I have mentioned already that the cost could be taken out of seized Gaddafi assets.


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Sacremist said:


> I hate it when the training aircraft fly over the countryside like the Lake District. Destroys the peace and quiet.


I live near what is said to be the busiet valley for training, so know what destroyers of peace and quiet they can be :lol:

But yeah the lakes are a popular area as well, especially for the Hawks from RAF Valley.


----------



## skyblue (Sep 15, 2010)

jamie1977 said:


> I see your point, but the government do withold a extremely large amount of money for "a rainy day", but the cost of this should not even need to dip into that. That is unless this action of course our involvement for some reason goes on for a extremely long time. There is also a suggestion the Arab League is paying a huge chunk of the cost (not sure if that is true), plus the possibility as I have mentioned already that the cost could be taken out of seized Gaddafi assets.


theres a good chance that the arab league are paying a huge chunk,and then some


----------



## bullet (Jan 25, 2009)

I think like it was said earlier, the situation is so complicated we will never know the full ins and outs of it. Every government is in each others pockets, all out to make money, theres nothing humanitarian about it, we mere mortals are just pawns in a power struggle. I like it when you see a non democratic country having the s**t kicked out of it by nato forces for not towing the line


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

bullet said:


> I think like it was said earlier, the situation is so complicated we will never know the full ins and outs of it. Every government is in each others pockets, all out to make money, theres nothing humanitarian about it, we mere mortals are just pawns in a power struggle. *I like it when you see a non democratic country having the s**t kicked out of it by nato forces for not towing the line:*(


Not quite a "not towing the line" situation here though, when you speak to people who have been victims of the Libyan Regime, especailly in the last few weeks. Would now follow this with a scenerio but can not think of one that explains what I want to say


----------



## bullet (Jan 25, 2009)

jamie1977 said:


> Not quite a "not towing the line" situation here though, when you speak to people who have been victims of the Libyan Regime, especailly in the last few weeks. Would now follow this with a scenerio but can not think of one that explains what I want to say


I think i know what you're saying, but my mind has started to wilt so i'll leave it there


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

But who exacts justices on the World Police for their war crimes, torture, illegal imprisonment etc etc and as for democracy???... the UK government was not elected and the US system is so flawed that during the last election where Bush got in they simply stopped counting papers to give him the victory (even then he actually got less votes than the others but there is a weird electoral college as well).


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

Eiffel Tower evacuated after suspicious package found - connected???

I think it was a false alarm just to try and scare the french public into turning against their government. 

In fact it was a false alarm going by timings, they had a call at about mid day saying the bomb was going to be detonated at 1700hrs GMT, which has obviously passed. I know they did find a suspect package but no one would give such a big window of warning.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

well we can expect alot more than that both hoaxes & sadly the real thing


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> well we can expect alot more than that both hoaxes & sadly the real thing


No doubt we will (mostly hoaxes) but if we let the threat rule our day to day activities then "they" win.

("They" could be used for all sides of the arguement).


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I've just been saying the very same thing to my hubby.God forbid it does happen,but i can see bombings in this country like we did with the IRA.
> As you say,the sooner Cameron is out the better.*


*What i posted on page 13 of this thread.I thought we were supposed to learn from our mistakes,but we never do.:nono:*


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

This could be unconnected though (though i do admit no other reason springs to mind)

edited to add - It was also evacuated on Feb 26th, and twice last year (one of which was September I think from memory) due to bomb threats. So does show even prior to Libya it was the target of hoaxes.


----------



## frosty2010 (Apr 2, 2010)

> Originally Posted by bullet
> I see its costing us £2million a day just to put aircraft and missiles in the air, i'm glad we're having to cut back on essential services so we can pay for it. I would hate to see this goverment recklessly spending my hard earned cash





Elmo the Bear said:


> They've already given _your_ cash to the banks.... this is your kids cash they're spending.


Got to agree with this!

Not much more I can add other than Cameron is on a crazy power trip. Does he think he is the world police or something?

Careful how you read this bit: Hitler did great things for Germany BEFORE he went looney toon and started to try building one equal race where everyone was the same. In his opinion his idea was nothing but good intentions but he was so tunnel visioned he couldnt see what he was doing wrong. He bought Germany out of a recession much worse than ours is at present, and it didnt take him long at all.

Cameron has neglected the fact we are in recession and involved with several wars in the middle east, and decided to jump straight into bed with another one, without sorting our countries own problems out first.

I have nothing against helping the world, but two things I do have problems with are:

1> Supplying weapons to other countries fullstop no matter who they are.
2> Using our tax money to help other countries when we have our own financial issues here in the UK.


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Don't apologise for Hitler...the megalomaniac murderer.

But the unemployed were put to work on building motorways and the infrastructure of a modern Germany.He gave the people a pride in being German.
The Hitler youth were smart and disciplined and put our lot to shame.A pity their heads were also filled with Nazi propaganda and hatred. 
He encouraged the design and building of an affordable peoples car.His administration didn't put up with the malingerers and drug addicts.

If he hadn't had designs on the rest of Europe and evil intent, he could have been a great leader of a great country.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

poohdog said:


> Don't apologise for Hitler...the megalomaniac murderer.
> 
> But the unemployed were put to work on building motorways and the infrastructure of a modern Germany.He gave the people a pride in being German.
> The Hitler youth were smart and disciplined and put our lot to shame.A pity their heads were also filled with Nazi propaganda and hatred.
> ...


and a small problem with Jewish minority?..homosexuals and gypsies...?..great man Hitler.., Mao, Stalin - your pick...


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Despite the bombings & the destruction of his Air Defences, Gaddafis troupes are still fighting the rebels as he see's them & still Killing them, I can't see there being enough of them to over throw gaddafi any bets some form of ground troupes will end up having to go in, because the fighting is just going to keep going until they kill all of the rebels!


----------



## jamie1977 (Jan 17, 2011)

0nyxx said:


> Despite the bombings & the destruction of his Air Defences, Gaddafis troupes are still fighting the rebels as he see's them & still Killing them, I can't see there being enough of them to over throw gaddafi any bets some form of ground troupes will end up having to go in, because the fighting is just going to keep going until they kill all of the rebels!


Once stage 1 of the operation is complete, then stage 2 will (hopefully) strengthen the rebels position. But until it is safe to do so the coalition have to attack from high level/a distance.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

they way Gaddafis going there wont be any bloody rebels left poor buggars are dropping like flies


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

Sacremist said:


> I hate it when the training aircraft fly over the countryside like the Lake District. Destroys the peace and quiet.


omg i love it when they do that, specially if i'm level or above them!

awesome!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

0nyxx said:


> Despite the bombings & the destruction of his Air Defences, Gaddafis troupes are still fighting the rebels as he see's them & still Killing them, I can't see there being enough of them to over throw gaddafi any bets some form of ground troupes will end up having to go in, because the fighting is just going to keep going until they kill all of the rebels!


*Now if Gaddafi's troops kill all the rebels, the way i see it the country will be standing alone again which is what should have been the case in the first place,imo. I don't know of any excuse our lot could come up with,not to pull out of the sittuation if Gaddfi wins.*


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> *Now if Gaddafi's troops kill all the rebels, the way i see it the country will be standing alone again which is what should have been the case in the first place,imo. I don't know of any excuse our lot could come up with,not to pull out of the sittuation if Gaddfi wins.*


Oh there will be some excuse made to keep them there i bet!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

harley bear said:


> Oh there will be some excuse made to keep them there i bet!


*lol I bet they know the outcome already.But they like to think we are too thick to understand whats going on.*


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> *lol I bet they know the outcome already.But they like to think we are too thick to understand whats going on.*


Yeah thats about right.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

but the people of the UK arent as thick as David Cameron might like to think lol any bets there wil be an early election:tongue_smilie: cant come soon enugh


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

March in London protesting against this goverment est 50.000 people... The best banner I saw " Thatcher mk 11... a Condemed Nation!!


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

the Chancellor Osborne was asked by an interviewer on radio four today.....

"Will todays protest have any effect on the decisions you have made"

His instant answer...."No"

Not...'we will give consideration to the views of others' or anything like that.....Just "No"

The only thing they would take notice of is massive violent protest like the poll tax riots.
They tell us to protest peacefully for one reason....so that they can bloody ignore us.

Tunisia or Egypt could happen here if they push us too far.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

there will be a real riot at some point because people are just so pissed off with what he's doing the mans an idiot!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

northnsouth said:


> March in London protesting against this goverment est 50.000 people... The best banner I saw " Thatcher mk 11... a Condemed Nation!!


*Well they got that right,but imo Cameron is no Thatcher,he's worse.*


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Speaking of dislike for our respective leaders, here's whats floating around over here....


----------



## Stephen&Dogs (Dec 11, 2010)

What's with all this hatin' on cameron!


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Bandy said:


> Speaking of dislike for our respective leaders, here's whats floating around over here....


*And this one...*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Bandy said:


> Speaking of dislike for our respective leaders, here's whats floating around over here....


I think that badge is a little out of date.... I think you needed him to sort out the last guy..!... still too late now... the damage is done


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Stephen&Dogs said:


> What's with all this hatin' on cameron!


Might be something to do with him being a self obsessed, over important, multi-millionaire, 'we're all in it together' fakir, b*llshitting, smarmy, toady, unelected, lying, cowardly, shiny faced, useless, pointless, tory, right wing, public school, silver spoon munching little git...............

..

.................... or it could be something else?

But to share the love... Clegg is worse because at least Cameron admitted to being a self obsessed, over important, multi-millionaire, 'we're all in it together' fakir, b*llshitting, smarmy, toady, unelected, lying, cowardly, shiny faced, useless, pointless, tory, right wing, public school, silver spoon munching little git........... Clegg tried to pretend to be something else!


----------



## Stephen&Dogs (Dec 11, 2010)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Might be something to do with him being a self obsessed, over important, multi-millionaire, 'we're all in it together' fakir, b*llshitting, smarmy, toady, unelected, lying, cowardly, shiny faced, useless, pointless, tory, right wing, public school, silver spoon munching little git...............
> 
> ..
> 
> ...


I'll give you that


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Might be something to do with him being a self obsessed, over important, multi-millionaire, 'we're all in it together' fakir, b*llshitting, smarmy, toady, unelected, lying, cowardly, shiny faced, useless, pointless, tory, right wing, public school, silver spoon munching little git...............
> 
> ..
> 
> ...


*Omg i'm lmfao here, brilliant reply.:thumbsup::lol::lol::lol: I take it your not too keen on him then?*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Omg i'm lmfao here, brilliant reply.:thumbsup::lol::lol::lol: I take it your not too keen on him then?*


To be fair I don't believe in parliamentary politics at all... I prefer democracy.


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> To be fair I don't believe in parliamentary politics at all... I prefer democracy.


Hamper anyone?... or maybe some marmalade


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> To be fair I don't believe in parliamentary politics at all... I prefer democracy.


*I remember the days when we had one of those.*


----------



## Elmo the Bear (Oct 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I remember the days when we had one of those.*


Blimey... that'll be somewhere about 1653.... you've aged well!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Elmo the Bear said:


> Blimey... that'll be somewhere about 1653.... you've aged well!


*Ah but your forgetting,i look at the past through rose tinted glasses....apparently.*


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

Excellent description of Cameron & his winnet Clegg Elmo made me chuckle me thinks we are very much on the same wave length there  as ive said before he doesn't bloody know what hard ship is he's probably never been skint!

After loosing his disabled son too you'd think he'd be all for supporting our NHS & allowances for those who need them, not trying to destroy them!!!

Thats the only time I felt anything other than dislike for the man, the death of any child is tragic!


----------

