Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bogbrush

Brown To Say "we're Doing The Right Thing" In Afghanistan

Recommended Posts

According to the radio, that's what The Great leader is due to say. I almost spat my coffee out when I heard it.

I hope he does utter the reassuring words; we'll know for sure we have our wonderful Prime Minister back for sure!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
According to the radio, that's what The Great leader is due to say. I almost spat my coffee out when I heard it.

I hope he does utter the reassuring words; we'll know for sure we have our wonderful Prime Minister back for sure!

You can't fault the man on maintaining consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Taking care (Tony Soprano style) of hard-working Afghan families. It's the right thing to do."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Right Thing? When did State sponsored murder ever become "The Right Thing"?

Pull the troops out! They should never have even been there in the first place! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you who have forgotten why we bombed & invaded Afghanistan in the first place,

I'll recap:

We asked them to hand over Bin Laden for carrying out 9/11.

They asked for evidence of his guilt.

And we didn't actually have any. In fact, the FBI have admitted there is nothing at all suggesting he was involved.

I've started refering to people who think that Osama-Bin-Laden was behind 911 as conspiricy theorists.

2 options:

1) The US government orcestrated a false-flag attack to allow them to carry out the military actions they needed to do to gain control of vital energy resources and secure the countries future.

2) A Dr Evil-esk mad-man is hiding in a secret cave-lair in Afganistan, directing terrorism accross the globe.

The US gov would have us think he is sat there, stroking a white cat. Interestingly, more than 50% of americans think the US gov was in some way involved in 911.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems to be the standard gov. getout clause -

<killing spree with katana>

</killing spree with katana>

"it was The Right Thing to do"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you who have forgotten why we bombed & invaded Afghanistan in the first place,

I'll recap:

We asked them to hand over Bin Laden for carrying out 9/11.

They asked for evidence of his guilt.

I think it's more:

The yanks want a strategic base in a region near their rivals - Russia and China;

We want to suck up to the school bully.

We have no strategic interest in Afghanistan; we have a strategic interest in being best friends with the yanks. The deaths of little brown men or little white men are "an acceptable price" to pay for this interest in the view of TPTB,

Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to the radio, that's what The Great leader is due to say. I almost spat my coffee out when I heard it.

I hope he does utter the reassuring words; we'll know for sure we have our wonderful Prime Minister back for sure!

yep the worlds gone mad

we kill people to bring peace to the world

we spend our way to prosperity

debt=wealth etc..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMWvbMCHwCY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's more:

The yanks want a strategic base in a region near their rivals - Russia and China;

We want to suck up to the school bully.

We have no strategic interest in Afghanistan; we have a strategic interest in being best friends with the yanks. The deaths of little brown men or little white men are "an acceptable price" to pay for this interest in the view of TPTB,

Peter.

The strategic interest in Afghanistan is the global drugs trade.

The strategic interest in Iraq and Iran is oil.

The events of 911 effectively gave the green light for the invasions.

How was the most powerful military regime in the world unable to see or know anything prior to the 911 attacks yet 4 hours after the event they knew who did it, how they did it and where in the world they were hiding?

BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And we didn't actually have any. In fact, the FBI have admitted there is nothing at all suggesting he was involved.

I've started refering to people who think that Osama-Bin-Laden was behind 911 as conspiricy theorists.

2 options:

1) The US government orcestrated a false-flag attack to allow them to carry out the military actions they needed to do to gain control of vital energy resources and secure the countries future.

2) A Dr Evil-esk mad-man is hiding in a secret cave-lair in Afganistan, directing terrorism accross the globe.

The US gov would have us think he is sat there, stroking a white cat. Interestingly, more than 50% of americans think the US gov was in some way involved in 911.

Dont put down to conspiracy what you can put down to,

a being lazy

b being stuid

c both

d forgot cowardise

GWB was involved in it he sacked the guys trying to stop Bin Laden to save money, Clinton would not Autherise Killing Bin Laden because he is in the words of the Lion of Panshir a coward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL at Brown following the autocue:

"blah, blah, blah.

[sad bit coming up, slow down Gordon to show you're really sincere]

"...brave....soldier.....lost....leg"

[ok, sad bit over]

blah, blah, blah

[another sad bit, go into sincere staccato mode again Gordon]

"...lost...their....lives...."

[ok, speed up, on with the bull, well done]

blah, blah, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The strategic interest in Afghanistan is the global drugs trade.

I have to disagree. Drug production was falling under the Taliban. The 'success' claimed by the government in reducing opium production in Helmand this week only takes poppy production back to 2005 levels. Not that the government (or anyone else) really gives a damn about junkies anyway. Considering they can't even stop heroin getting into maximum-security prisons in the UK the idea that they could stop it getting out of Afghanistan is shear fantasy.

Afghanistan is the gateway of Central Asia. The Soviets invaded to try and gain access to the sea. The West has invaded to try and gain access to both the riches and the strategic locations of Central Asia. Since the dawn of civilisation the highways that criss-cross the Kazakh steppe and the Uzbek deserts have carried trade and invading armies. This war has nothing to do with democracy, female emancipation, the drug trade or counter-terrorism. All these justifications were used by the Soviets in the 1980s (and by the British in the 1840s etc etc etc). British soldiers are fighting and dying for geo-political reasons. It is a bare-faced use of military force to promote US/UK strategic and economic interests. History will not judge us as the 'good guys' in this conflict, particularly as we're not going to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you who have forgotten why we bombed & invaded Afghanistan in the first place,

I'll recap:

We asked them to hand over Bin Laden for carrying out 9/11.

They asked for evidence of his guilt.

Well if they did the implication of this was they had him and were harbouring him.In which case the US would be quite justified in attacking them,Bin Laden has admitted his guilt on video.A longer term foreign policy view might be that the eradication of Islam from the world would be a good thing.Or just build a wall around the bastards and give the women the option of political asylum as a persecuted group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if they did the implication of this was they had him and were harbouring him.In which case the US would be quite justified in attacking them,Bin Laden has admitted his guilt on video.A longer term foreign policy view might be that the eradication of Islam from the world would be a good thing.Or just build a wall around the bastards and give the women the option of political asylum as a persecuted group.

********!

Bin Laden denied involvement from the very start!

Sept 16th 2001

Bin Laden has denied any connection to the attacks, though he has praised them. On Sunday, he reiterated his denial in a statement read by Qatar's al-Jazeera satellite television channel.

"I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation," read the al-Jazeera announcer from the statement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34440,00.html

The only "proof" they have is the "fatty Bin Laden" video confession.

Compare "fatty Bin Laden" with Osama Bin Laden:

fatnose.jpg

:lol:

Do they really expect us to fall for this shit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if they did the implication of this was they had him and were harbouring him.In which case the US would be quite justified in attacking them,Bin Laden has admitted his guilt on video.A longer term foreign policy view might be that the eradication of Islam from the world would be a good thing.Or just build a wall around the bastards and give the women the option of political asylum as a persecuted group.

A longer term foreign policy view might remember that Bin Laden was armed and funded by the US in the 1980s with a view to driving the infidel Communists from Afghan soil. I remember that thousands of innocent Afghan civilians were killed in that proxy conflict too. But supposedly we are peace-loving champions of human rights, democracy and the rule of law while they are aggressive, backward savages who think nothing of cold-blooded murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's done it!

"Each time I ask myself if we are doing the right thing by being in Afghanistan and if we can justify sending our young men and women to fight for this cause, my answer has always been yes."

I knew I could count on our Prime Mentalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A longer term foreign policy view might remember that Bin Laden was armed and funded by the US in the 1980s with a view to driving the infidel Communists from Afghan soil. I remember that thousands of innocent Afghan civilians were killed in that proxy conflict too. But supposedly we are peace-loving champions of human rights, democracy and the rule of law while they are aggressive, backward savages who think nothing of cold-blooded murder.

Well there I do agree.It was Hopalong's Hollywood view of the world that sparked that one off,aided and abetted by Thatcher of course,your enemy's enemy is your friend policy.And while on the subject it was either Hopalongs unprovoked attack on Gaddafi's tent in 1986 or the shooting down of an Iranian airliner that resulted in Lockerbie.Either way it was those two responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.