(sorry to rant a bit i got a bit carried away so test your consentration and argue with my opinion, it will be interestin...)
I am british and i am awar that we have soldiers in iraq too, and they are doing pretty mutch what they do in northern island, i have noticed ya said we are not losing the war, i dont think you can win a war (like you cant win an earth quake) lots of civilians are dting insurgents will only be in iraq so long as americans are there when the americans leave they will go back to killing each other in the mean time theyll shoot you yanks and the american army cant change that, think about it, if you nuke iraq who won the war? osama probaly. we got terrorist attacks in britain the other day and people didnt panik lots of people even said that its good to see a bit of war here too cos its only fair they get a pop at us back, do you think im liberal? i think republicans are a bit simple when it comes to complicated issues.war has been fought for thousands of years in europe, tho americas strong it realy should ignore the rest of the world as it should have no interest, its not like you guys ever liked arabs anyway and saddam wouldnt have been suspected of tryin to kill you guys unless you provoke him in the first place. you can argue about the poor people but when america is responsible for pain and suffering throughout the globe (bo phal india,trade sanctions, arms trade etc etc)it just doesnt make mutch sense at all.
as for your war of the worlds comment though i think you rite it is bullshit, although you cant beat insurgents in iraq.
OK, let's take this a piece at a time:
I am british and i am awar that we have soldiers in iraq too, and they are doing pretty mutch what they do in northern island, i have noticed ya said we are not losing the war, i dont think you can win a war (like you cant win an earth quake) lots of civilians are dting insurgents will only be in iraq so long as americans are there when the americans leave they will go back to killing each other in the mean time theyll shoot you yanks and the american army cant change that, think about it, if you nuke iraq who won the war? osama probaly.
One thing that boggles my mind is the fact that people act as if terrorism started with Iraq. You, living where you do, should know better. For a refresher course, I posted a timeline here a while ago, with a link to another site. There was also one posted over at the Mudville Gazette fairly recently, and you can also go here for info.
And as far as killing civilians go....Saddam was doing a pretty good job of that long before we got there....Halabja, for example.....have you missed all of those mass graves we found?
Oh, and by the way, the American left often argues that there was never any connection between the War on Terror and Iraq.....so if we "nuke Iraq" - which is NOT any game plan I've ever heard of, how could Osama win?
we got terrorist attacks in britain the other day and people didnt panik lots of people even said that its good to see a bit of war here too cos its only fair they get a pop at us back, do you think im liberal? i think republicans are a bit simple when it comes to complicated issues.I can't say anything bad about the way the Brits reacted to the terror attacks. I am, however, of the opinion, that the terrorists have gotten plenty of "pops" along the way as it is. I think "fair" would be to see the murdering losers suffer whatever horrible hell I believe fate has in store for people like them.
Yeah, you sound like a wee bit o' the liberal to me. (And as an Irish-Scots-American, I really feel I have to point out that it's Northern IRELAND, not Island - wink). And as for the simple / complicated issue, I think liberals are a bit complicated when it comes to simple issues.
war has been fought for thousands of years in europe, tho americas strong it realy should ignore the rest of the world as it should have no interest, its not like you guys ever liked arabs anyway and saddam wouldnt have been suspected of tryin to kill you guys unless you provoke him in the first place. you can argue about the poor people but when america is responsible for pain and suffering throughout the globe (bo phal india,trade sanctions, arms trade etc etc)it just doesnt make mutch sense at all.Wait a minute - I thought we were supposed to be more like Europe because it was so peaceful and happy....what gives? And "its not like you guys ever liked Arabs anyway"? Wow. I would refer you to "protected classes" under American anti-discrimination law - y'know, race, religion, creed, gender, national origin, marital status, age... we like Arabs just fine - we're just not particularly fond of terrorists. Saddam wouldn't have been suspected of trying to kill us if we hadn't provoked him? Um.....invasion of Kuwait....UN Sanctions....shooting at American aircraft (sometimes daily) in the no-fly zone....Ba'athist party believes in one Arab nation under them....Saddam paying bounties to the families of dead suicide bombers....Not to put it in too "simple" terms, but he's the one who provoked. The first time, basically the WHOLE WORLD decided to kick his butt. It's just that certain nations who shall remain nameless but supplied significant amounts of banned materials to Iraq decided to stand in the way, and certain ridiculously lame-duck multi-national organizations (funded SIGNIFICANTLY by American dollars, might I add) decided not to enforce their own sanctions....
Um....Bhopal was an industrial accident, involving a private company, not the American government (and actually, 49% of the plant was owned by private Indian companies). It's a matter for U.S. civil courts, and apparently, India's criminal court system......y'know, industrial accident...kind of like Chernobyl...but that must not have happened, 'cause it wasn't Americans that did it. At any rate, what the heck has THAT got to do with Iraq?
Trade sanctions - are you saying we can't decide who we will and won't do business with???? Sorry, but if you're an enemy, I think we have the right to say, "no, actually, we won't be supporting your country."
Arms trade? Puh-lease. Surely you didn't mean to imply that the US is the leader in the arms trade. We're just a little bitty fish in a very big pond on that one. Take a look at the weapons killing troops in Iraq, and you'll find a few "civilized" European countries there, my British friend.
As for the War of the Worlds comment (here, in the infamous poster post) - yes, it is, and oh yes, we can.
Still, thanks for the mail - it was a whole heck of a lot better than the ridiculous name-caller that followed it.
Feel free to chime in, folks...
(right click image, then "Save as")
Stumble It!
