FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > conscription?
conscription?
Jump to: Newest in thread
As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
Are you high? If I look left in a fire fight I don't want a shoplifter called Tracy backing me up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
I'm not sure children should be offered the opportunity, but grown adults yes.
How much take up there would be I don't know...offenders are usually very disestablishment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Are you high? If I look left in a fire fight I don't want a shoplifter called Tracy backing me up. "
Laughing so hard   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Are you high? If I look left in a fire fight I don't want a shoplifter called Tracy backing me up. "
Agree, or worse still some juvenile delinquent with no self control or sense of duty. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Considering the government is still trying to reduce the size of our armed forces, i think we're a long way from conscription. Also when was the last time a conscripted army was any use? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Plus the fact if it ever come to that I'm sure there will be voluntary waves first. At least then we can see if all the armchair general gobshites who mouth off in those threads actually back up their claims. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Or offenders with racially motivated crimes, either. Or sexual offenders. "
Pedophiles could be utilised in mine clearing operations. This idea has legs... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think,unless they got life that most would rather spend a few years in a cushy prison than risk their lives in a foreign country,being shot at by rebel fighters. Unless you mean just do the basic training because it's cheaper to feed and house a soldier than it is a prisoner. On the other hand,all those muslim petty criminals might take up the offer of free weapons training. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
Are you mad, is my reaction.
Do you really think that the military would welcome this suggestion? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I would not take the dirty dozen as a manual for peak war time operations.
I'd also suggest that saying we are going to war is a bit OTT.
We are going no where near war and not to any level that will have much of a difference.
At the moment we are playing at war with ISIS, it's a complicated issue over there so we throw a few bombs in to look like we care.
But lets be real, if any major power actually got involved ISIS would be wiped out as a regional player within a relatively short time scale.
They have a great PR machine but they are not the new Nazis. They are not going to blitzkrieg across the whole of the Arabian peninsula.
The truth is we could kick them back under the stone where they came from, but no one would thank us for it. Someone else would get upset with outsiders getting involved in the middle east.
So we are having this compromise of the outside world saying fine, we'll leave it to the locals to sort out, but we are not going to risk ISIS slowly gaining ground in the mean time. So here is some air support.
It's a mess but I think conscription is way of base. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
What a wonderful idea....give those with no regard for discipline, authority and rules legal access to gun and shit  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
Double edged sword. On the one hand you're giving them an option for redemption, on the other hand, you're giving lawbreakers weaponry and training. Also, for those in juvenile detention, you would have to have parental consent also |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
Out government is currently attempting to save money by risking our national security through cuts to the armed services and police.
As spending even more money to train people to be in the army who don't respect authority and have no desire to be there would be totally insane and represent a further risk to our national security...then yes, George Osborne is probably working out the finer details at the moment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Out government is currently attempting to save money by risking our national security through cuts to the armed services and police.
As spending even more money to train people to be in the army who don't respect authority and have no desire to be there would be totally insane and represent a further risk to our national security...then yes, George Osborne is probably working out the finer details at the moment."
Magic. Made me laugh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB "
Good job a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny percentage are terrorists then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Out government is currently attempting to save money by risking our national security through cuts to the armed services and police.
As spending even more money to train people to be in the army who don't respect authority and have no desire to be there would be totally insane and represent a further risk to our national security...then yes, George Osborne is probably working out the finer details at the moment."
He confirmed this morning that the Home Office has now agreed to the cuts.
I had hoped what happened in Paris would make them rethink. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't think you would end up with suitable soldiers. We need skilled soldiers, not cannon fodder. "
And for this reason conscription also seems extremely unlikely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
I know the last person I want beside me in the trenches is someone who decided it was a better option than a spell in prison.
I'd want someone who was there out of duty and pride, who had the same training as me, someone I knew who I could rely on when needed.
I suspect our generals would like this too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB "
I think you under estimate the number of muslims in Britain, by some 2.6 million.
But thankfully you over estimate the number who are remotely interested in fighting anyone, let alone the entire UK. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why on earth would we want to have to manage a bunch of lowlifes? We're busy enough as it is to take a bunch of people thatdon't want to be there."
You could have gone into teaching if that's what you wanted to be doing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
One volunteer is worth ten pressed men.
A lot of recruits who want to be in the forces don't make it through training.
Why would someone from prison put the effort in.
It might help a very small number of prisoners to change the course of their life, but hard to tell beforehand.
Instead of forcing people into being soldiers, why not make being a soldier a more attractive career. Oh yes, that would take money |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB "
now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines. "
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lot of "jobs" in the army aren't front-line though. They always need people to dig holes and paint stones white."
Stones do look nice white . It's actually paint the coal white so they can see if anyone has been pinching the coal at a glance |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines.
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home , "
Yeh, fucking freeloaders. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?"
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Really?
I think you'll find there is a very good bunch of people who already deal with rehabilitation. But they're underfunded and under recognised. They walk into a hostile situation everyday, but nobody gives them a second thought. They're called Prison Officers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines.
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home ,
Yeh, fucking freeloaders. "
If women wer just as accountable in wars to fight , I am sure the amount of wars would go down |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I know it sounds far fetched but there will be a need for ground troops as well as air support in places like Syria as we can't just drop bombs everywhere, and hope for the best, ignoring the innocent civilians that are maimed and killed in the process.
We used the idea in both world wars of carefully screened prisoners voluntarily signing up. It saved the cost of housing them and re-offending rates of those who survived was low as they were taught discipline, respect for themselves as well as authority, and learned a trade (lots of trades in the services not just as cannon fodder).
As a female who is not a prisoner, I might be exempt, but if I was asked to voluntarily fight to protect my country and my family as long as I was classed as fit enough id be front of the queue. Obviously not everyone would feel like that but I'm sure there are many minor offenders who would appreciate the second chance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines.
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home ,
Yeh, fucking freeloaders.
If women wer just as accountable in wars to fight , I am sure the amount of wars would go down "
Female soldiers want frontline equality, silly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines.
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home ,
Yeh, fucking freeloaders.
If women wer just as accountable in wars to fight , I am sure the amount of wars would go down "
 Thanks for that, I needed a laugh. Kudos for creatively shoehorning your hatred of women into a completely unrelated thread. Do you think you can manage to the unfairness of divorce settlements and access to children in too? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Take some nutter from jail get him super fit, train him how to use a rifle, 
What could possibly go wrong? 
Claire
XX "
Ironically one of my brother in laws was sent to borstal when he was a teenager. They had to run everywhere and he came out super fit and so fast the police couldn't catch him. He did manage to sort himself out and run his own business though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Are you mad, is my reaction.
Do you really think that the military would welcome this suggestion?"
Actually it's not that far fetched a suggestion. The French Foreign Legion took in a lot of criminals on the run and possibly still do. Murder was the only crime you could not hide from if I remember correctly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
Waste of time, plus you end up training scroats who can use that against society.
As someone who has served, the last thing I'd want as I kick in a door and lob a grenade is wondering if the guy behind me was up for the job.... much prefer those who want to be there, rather than those who have to be there! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I doubt modern warfare would necessitate conscription.
But if it does I think women should take their turn on the front lines.
Yes they have been going on about equality etc etc for years . Let them go and fight the future wars . Let us men sit at home ,
Yeh, fucking freeloaders.
If women wer just as accountable in wars to fight , I am sure the amount of wars would go down
Thanks for that, I needed a laugh. Kudos for creatively shoehorning your hatred of women into a completely unrelated thread. Do you think you can manage to the unfairness of divorce settlements and access to children in too?"
Women do fight in wars in other parts of the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
As we have a son, who serves in specialist forces, no we would not want people who are not committed, and only there because they were forced. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Or offenders with racially motivated crimes, either. Or sexual offenders.
Pedophiles could be utilised in mine clearing operations. This idea has legs..."
They might not though! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children. "
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing. "
I don't think we're okay with it. There will always be innocent casualties of war, it doesn't mean we go "ah well". I also don't think this all was caused by the west bombing children. I dunno why you're focused on children so much. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing. "
Yep it's all our fault.
Because we started the uprising in Syria.
We told the Talaban to attack America.
Yes Iraq was a huge error but this was going on years before Iraq. If anything Iraq has excelerated the process, so yes terrible idea.
But there were always extreme 'Muslims' who just want to kill western society.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing. "
Of course all the people who have just lost their lives due to terrorist activities were all guilty weren't they?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing.
Yep it's all our fault.
Because we started the uprising in Syria.
We told the Talaban to attack America.
Yes Iraq was a huge error but this was going on years before Iraq. If anything Iraq has excelerated the process, so yes terrible idea.
But there were always extreme 'Muslims' who just want to kill western society.
"
Our responsibility for the mess in the Middle East stretches back to the aftermath of the First World War, you don't need to look at how we've destabilised the region in recent years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
sounds like the dirty dozen,I disagree,I do not agree with war unless Cameron is also fighting alongside us
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing.
Of course all the people who have just lost their lives due to terrorist activities were all guilty weren't they?
"
They were no more guilty than the thousands upon thousands of innocents killed on the Middle East that spawned the radicalisation that caused their deaths, no. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing.
Yep it's all our fault.
Because we started the uprising in Syria.
We told the Talaban to attack America.
Yes Iraq was a huge error but this was going on years before Iraq. If anything Iraq has excelerated the process, so yes terrible idea.
But there were always extreme 'Muslims' who just want to kill western society.
Our responsibility for the mess in the Middle East stretches back to the aftermath of the First World War, you don't need to look at how we've destabilised the region in recent years."
Which goes back further to pre first world war.
Which goes back to the middle and dark ages, which goes back to roman Greek and Egyptian times.
Which goes back to before that.
At some point those doing the dirty need to take responsibility for their own actions and not use history to justify every thing.
Can I go blow up strangers in Norway for their rape and pillaging in years gone by.
Fuck the fact that they had nothing to do with it and I have no reason to be offended on my ancestors behalf. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"The working thing is there is 82.000 British troops and over 100.000 Muslims in GB now that's an idea. We need more diversity in the army. We need to start recruiting from the Muslim community. Good plan. But unfortunately the Russians have just killed 97 children in Syria, I don't think there's any real Muslims who would go for that. I'm not a Muslim. But I'm not up for killing 97 children. I mean that makes Dunblane look like a picknick.
Perhaps getting a clue might be an idea?
I don't think you have to be Muslim to not want to kill children.
Yet we as a nation seem remarkably happy with it. Our bombs killed thousands. You not seen the videos of children being mown down by helicopter gunships. No wonder there's radicalisation. You destroy innocent people's homes and displace them take away their way of life they are ripe for brainwashing.
Yep it's all our fault.
B
Because we started the uprising in Syria.
We told the Talaban to attack America.
Yes Iraq was a huge error but this was going on years before Iraq. If anything Iraq has excelerated the process, so yes terrible idea.
But there were always extreme 'Muslims' who just want to kill western society.
Our responsibility for the mess in the Middle East stretches back to the aftermath of the First World War, you don't need to look at how we've destabilised the region in recent years.
Which goes back further to pre first world war.
Which goes back to the middle and dark ages, which goes back to roman Greek and Egyptian times.
Which goes back to before that.
At some point those doing the dirty need to take responsibility for their own actions and not use history to justify every thing.
Can I go blow up strangers in Norway for their rape and pillaging in years gone by.
Fuck the fact that they had nothing to do with it and I have no reason to be offended on my ancestors behalf. "
No, the roots of the current mess are the political division of the territory after the First World War. It doesn't go back further than that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think people should pull their brains out of their arseholes, and stop behaving like cave people. Thousands of years of war and few have learned it does no good whatsoever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think people should pull their brains out of their arseholes, and stop behaving like cave people. Thousands of years of war and few have learned it does no good whatsoever."
A nice none aggressive stance to take. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
At the end of the day it's all immaterial. The Hellfires will soon be raining down a stopgap will be put in place after a hard fought victory. Then it will happen all over again perhaps a bit longer this time though.
Repeat ad nauseam.
War huh!!!! What is it good for?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At the end of the day it's all immaterial. The Hellfires will soon be raining down a stopgap will be put in place after a hard fought victory. Then it will happen all over again perhaps a bit longer this time though.
Repeat ad nauseam.
War huh!!!! What is it good for?
"
Selling guns, drugs, people.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'd like to point out by the way that I am anti war, id fight to protect my family and our country if it came down to it but I pray it never gets that far. War has gone on for thousands of years, women have been involved in those wars every step of the way but usually in a volunteer role, and the reason women are less likely (although women often now do) to fight front line is to protect us from atrocities of war such as being tortured by gang rape.
As I see it men (or women) on the ground fighting is going to be the best way to get rid of the terrorists without major civilian casualties as there have been too many on both sides.
And my last point before I go into waffle mode is that even though those who are fighting in the name of religion do not have the backing of the many who are peaceful and decent. They are brainwashed into radicalisation by both the promise of riches (isis, al Qaeda and several others are wealthier than many small countries, as well as the sight of innocents being killed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think people should pull their brains out of their arseholes, and stop behaving like cave people. Thousands of years of war and few have learned it does no good whatsoever.
A nice none aggressive stance to take."
It wasn't aimed at anyone on here, but I take your point. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At the end of the day it's all immaterial. The Hellfires will soon be raining down a stopgap will be put in place after a hard fought victory. Then it will happen all over again perhaps a bit longer this time though.
Repeat ad nauseam.
War huh!!!! What is it good for?
Selling guns, drugs, people.
"
And shares  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X"
Why would the armed forces want a bunch of prisoners. nowadays we have volunteer forces and they can choose the best. Only interested in motivated people.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm afraid war is part of human nature.
Has little to do with any belief or society.
Just watch neighbours at war to see that we are generally poor at getting along with each other.
Put a reasonable member of society in a car and they become angry inconsiderate arses.
To quote Terminator 2. It's in our nature to destroy ourselves. Major bummer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At the end of the day it's all immaterial. The Hellfires will soon be raining down a stopgap will be put in place after a hard fought victory. Then it will happen all over again perhaps a bit longer this time though.
Repeat ad nauseam.
War huh!!!! What is it good for?
Selling guns, drugs, people.
And shares "
Very true.
Also generally good for folk music sales. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i for one don't want any scrote wearing the queens uniform unless they want to. to be made to would be an insult to all the guys and girls that are serving now and all that have fallen in the past. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"In your convenience I'm sure it is."
Not sure what you mean by that, but the political roots of modern conflict in the region are clearly stem from Western politicking beginning with the aftermath of WW1. If you don't agree, you either don't know the history of the region, or you don't understand the modern conflict. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"
As I see it men (or women) on the ground fighting is going to be the best way to get rid of the terrorists without major civilian casualties as there have been too many on both sides. "
Any 'on the ground fighting' in the region is going to result in major civilian casualties. Thousands will die, if not hundreds of thousands. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Why would the armed forces want a bunch of prisoners. nowadays we have volunteer forces and they can choose the best. Only interested in motivated people...."
The military have a long history of taking those who criminal records & turning them into soldiers!!!
They break them down & build them up give them a home & a purpose.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In your convenience I'm sure it is.
Not sure what you mean by that, but the political roots of modern conflict in the region are clearly stem from Western politicking beginning with the aftermath of WW1. If you don't agree, you either don't know the history of the region, or you don't understand the modern conflict."
You missed the use of FACT on the end of that, therefore elevating your point of view from mere opinion to incontestable truth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"In your convenience I'm sure it is.
Not sure what you mean by that, but the political roots of modern conflict in the region are clearly stem from Western politicking beginning with the aftermath of WW1. If you don't agree, you either don't know the history of the region, or you don't understand the modern conflict.
You missed the use of FACT on the end of that, therefore elevating your point of view from mere opinion to incontestable truth."
You are welcome to try to disprove the truth of my 'opinion'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Why would the armed forces want a bunch of prisoners. nowadays we have volunteer forces and they can choose the best. Only interested in motivated people....
The military have a long history of taking those who criminal records & turning them into soldiers!!!
They break them down & build them up give them a home & a purpose.."
The military have a long history of taking those who criminal records & turning them into soldiers!!!
They break them down & build them up give them a home & a purpose..
Which planet are you living on.. our military don't come from a disheveled and ragged background. you are vetted and any criminal past is thoroughly looked into before even being considered to be allowed to serve.... idiot! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As everyone knows practically every day there's more atrocities happening, and its seeming more inevitable that we are going to be at war with the terrorists.
My opinion is that prisoners and those in juvenile detention should be offered the chance to join the army to serve the country and reduce their sentences before we consider conscription. What's everyone's opinions? X
Why would the armed forces want a bunch of prisoners. nowadays we have volunteer forces and they can choose the best. Only interested in motivated people....
The military have a long history of taking those who criminal records & turning them into soldiers!!!
They break them down & build them up give them a home & a purpose.."
Anyone with any criminal intent usually get kicked out because they don't want shit like them,or they go awol and run back to mummy when they realise it's going to get tough. Although I do know one person who joined up because he was going down a slippery slope and came out with a career. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
lets think about that offer.
prisoner 953 you have been given a golden offer. relinquish your tax free, all inclusive food and soft drinks (drugs and alcohol limited supply), free nhs including prescriptions and protection from nasty people but if you do get hurt you may sue for compensation; for the opportunity to be sent into a danger zone, boil, freeze, live in fear, be ill equipped, stay awake for 20 hours on shift and if you do get limbs blown off await nhs prosthetics, but you'll be proud to protect the people that locked you up and will probably not employ you due to your police record.
if you can sell that one maybe you can convince the politicians that got the world to this state of affairs to stand on the front line and think about what drives people to feel they have to fight like this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1."
No-one is suggesting that it was all 'peace and roses'. Nowhere anywhere has always been all peace and roses. But that doesn't mean that history and the chain of events within cannot be observed.
If you don't know the history, then it seems churlish to dismiss what you don't know. When there are clear historical reasons in modern history that we can observe, it is a little absurd to dismiss them in favour of saying 'it's always been awful, we have no responsibility'.
People may not like it, but we in the West bear a significant responsibility for the violent divisions that exist in the region today. That doesn't fit with being able to blame the troubles on people who live in the region being 'madmen', 'savages', 'insane murderers' and all the other things you will hear on here and elsewhere though, so it is usually conveniently ignored. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The military have a long history of taking those who criminal records & turning them into soldiers!!!
They break them down & build them up give them a home & a purpose..
Which planet are you living on.. our military don't come from a disheveled and ragged background. you are vetted and any criminal past is thoroughly looked into before even being considered to be allowed to serve.... idiot!"
Who said they were disheveled & ragged?
I said they take ppl with criminal records regardless of yes they are vetted just like any other recruit but they STILL take ppl with criminal records.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone with any criminal intent usually get kicked out because they don't want shit like them,or they go awol and run back to mummy when they realise it's going to get tough. Although I do know one person who joined up because he was going down a slippery slope and came out with a career. "
I served with quite a few ppl with dodgy pasts who did there full term of service they had signed for .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
No-one is suggesting that it was all 'peace and roses'. Nowhere anywhere has always been all peace and roses. But that doesn't mean that history and the chain of events within cannot be observed.
If you don't know the history, then it seems churlish to dismiss what you don't know. When there are clear historical reasons in modern history that we can observe, it is a little absurd to dismiss them in favour of saying 'it's always been awful, we have no responsibility'.
People may not like it, but we in the West bear a significant responsibility for the violent divisions that exist in the region today. That doesn't fit with being able to blame the troubles on people who live in the region being 'madmen', 'savages', 'insane murderers' and all the other things you will hear on here and elsewhere though, so it is usually conveniently ignored."
What I don't get is why you insist on drawing a line in history at British rule, those troubles go way back before the 'west' were involved but for the convenience of your argument you ignore all the violence and invasions before the British, happy that you have a scapegoat to explain away all the issues.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
You said British rule, I said 'the West'. The main architects of the current disaster were Britain and France after WW1, compounded by US, Russian and European involvement since.
Here is a simplified history for you, which will answer some of your questions. Obviously there is much more to it than this, but it's a good start point: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25299553
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You said British rule, I said 'the West'. The main architects of the current disaster were Britain and France after WW1, compounded by US, Russian and European involvement since.
Here is a simplified history for you, which will answer some of your questions. Obviously there is much more to it than this, but it's a good start point: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25299553
"
My point stands, West or British. Call it what you like you are drawing a line where there is none.
There is a history of violence in this region long before the 'west'
Existed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Wow, you read that quick!
I don't need a history lesson thanks, you stick to simple history if you like but I prefer a more complex view. "
Okay, but you admit yourself you don't understand the history of the region.
So, you don't understand the history, you won't educate yourself about the history, but you want to be taken seriously with your opinion of why the history doesn't matter?
That doesn't make any sense, does it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"No you said I don't understand it.
Please stop projecting your opinions as my own.
"
You said this: ' don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire'
I am presuming here that what you post yourself about yourself is your opinion, not mine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No you said I don't understand it.
Please stop projecting your opinions as my own.
You said this: ' don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire'
I am presuming here that what you post yourself about yourself is your opinion, not mine."
Sarcasm seems to be lost in the mail.
I assumed the rest of the post detailing the pre WW1 history would have helped, but obviously not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"No you said I don't understand it.
Please stop projecting your opinions as my own.
You said this: ' don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire'
I am presuming here that what you post yourself about yourself is your opinion, not mine.
Sarcasm seems to be lost in the mail.
I assumed the rest of the post detailing the pre WW1 history would have helped, but obviously not."
Sorry, the only reason anyone would deny the Sykes-Picot agreement is the significant factor in what has followed in the region and where we are today is if one was not aware of it, so your post didn't appear to be sarcastic.
So as you claim to understand that history now, perhaps you can refute it's importance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You said British rule, I said 'the West'. The main architects of the current disaster were Britain and France after WW1, compounded by US, Russian and European involvement since.
Here is a simplified history for you, which will answer some of your questions. Obviously there is much more to it than this, but it's a good start point: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25299553
My point stands, West or British. Call it what you like you are drawing a line where there is none.
There is a history of violence in this region long before the 'west'
Existed."
There's points on both sides really. There's certainly been some bad decisions in the region, the drawing or Iraqs borders seem destinated to make a failed state in my opinion. But the troubles in the region go way, way back. Frankly it's more accurate to think of it as a war zone with the ottoman empire being the blip of (relative) peace in its history. I find that more accurate than troubles starting with the fall of the ottomans. I recommend "A History of the Arab Peoples" by Albert Hourani for those really interested. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No you said I don't understand it.
Please stop projecting your opinions as my own.
You said this: ' don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire'
I am presuming here that what you post yourself about yourself is your opinion, not mine.
Sarcasm seems to be lost in the mail.
I assumed the rest of the post detailing the pre WW1 history would have helped, but obviously not.
Sorry, the only reason anyone would deny the Sykes-Picot agreement is the significant factor in what has followed in the region and where we are today is if one was not aware of it, so your post didn't appear to be sarcastic.
So as you claim to understand that history now, perhaps you can refute it's importance."
I think I've already mentioned the 'pre history' as you see it. But if you are insistent that prior difficulties and waring tribes have no bearing and it's all the 'wests' fault fine live in that world.
I'm sure your 100% spot on and the people in this region had no issues and never fought until post WW1.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"No you said I don't understand it.
Please stop projecting your opinions as my own.
You said this: ' don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire'
I am presuming here that what you post yourself about yourself is your opinion, not mine.
Sarcasm seems to be lost in the mail.
I assumed the rest of the post detailing the pre WW1 history would have helped, but obviously not.
Sorry, the only reason anyone would deny the Sykes-Picot agreement is the significant factor in what has followed in the region and where we are today is if one was not aware of it, so your post didn't appear to be sarcastic.
So as you claim to understand that history now, perhaps you can refute it's importance.
I think I've already mentioned the 'pre history' as you see it. But if you are insistent that prior difficulties and waring tribes have no bearing and it's all the 'wests' fault fine live in that world.
I'm sure your 100% spot on and the people in this region had no issues and never fought until post WW1.
"
Adding things in that I clearly haven't said in order to appear as if you are countering them with common sense is unnecessary, no?
Again, if you can't refute the significance of Sykes-Picot, you have to accept it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Our savage friends Isil want to annexe parts of my Country and that's outside the Sykes-Picot agreement the bastards!!
Tribal boundaries and warfare have been going on for hundreds of years. The Iranians would want nothing better than to march across Iraq and squash these savages. The Saudis would in no way want that to happen so won't let it because of aeons old disputes with them. The Jordanians would also flip out. And the Israelis would stomp anyone who comes even close
The point is you can debate who is wrong and who is right but what's going to happen will happen.
I just pray to Allah for the innocents caught up in the middle of it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Your original point.
"Our responsibility for the mess in the Middle East stretches back to the aftermath of the First World War, you don't need to look at how we've destabilised the region in recent years."
My point is that these uprisings and battles took place for centuries before any agreement.
Saying it's 'our' responsibility is no more valid than saying it was the fault of everyone who came before.
Hence every generation finding an excuse for their brutality and frustrations on some perceived slight from others.
It's all an excuse, as I say almost every nation and race has at one time or another been either the transgressor or transgressed against. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
The significance is that it clearly illustrates that external politicking in a region has effects that will last many generations.
It should serve as a warning to the West that the only sensible course of action is to get out and leave the entire region well alone, as our involvement has only ever exacerbated things. We can see this through the last hundred years, at whatever point one chooses to look at.
Of course, like all warnings based in history, it will be ignored, and we will all suffer as a result. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1."
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath. "
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
No-one is suggesting that it was all 'peace and roses'. Nowhere anywhere has always been all peace and roses. But that doesn't mean that history and the chain of events within cannot be observed.
If you don't know the history, then it seems churlish to dismiss what you don't know. When there are clear historical reasons in modern history that we can observe, it is a little absurd to dismiss them in favour of saying 'it's always been awful, we have no responsibility'.
People may not like it, but we in the West bear a significant responsibility for the violent divisions that exist in the region today. That doesn't fit with being able to blame the troubles on people who live in the region being 'madmen', 'savages', 'insane murderers' and all the other things you will hear on here and elsewhere though, so it is usually conveniently ignored.
What I don't get is why you insist on drawing a line in history at British rule, those troubles go way back before the 'west' were involved but for the convenience of your argument you ignore all the violence and invasions before the British, happy that you have a scapegoat to explain away all the issues.
"
I'm feel you're arguing with a one eye. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Modern-day Syria and Iraq both have antecedents in the pre-Islamic world. In the sixth century, the Arab tribal kingdom of the Ghassanids was located in much of the same area that is now Syria, while the Lakhmid kingdom was based in Iraq. These tribes fought each other as proxies for the two great world powers at the time: the Byzantines and Sassanians.
But it is more convenient to forget that it dates back to before any such concept as the west.
Even the 6th century was not the start of this, it goes back to even before Abraham was a lad. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
But I think you're wasting your breath.
Never a truer word spoken
It's funny how people always think you aren't listening to them when they don't like to address facts they can't refute.
 "
I think the implication is that Sykes-Picot is important, but not important enough to be considered the start of a series of events, rather it's a continuation of them. Without meaning to put words in anyones mouth? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath."
As I agree with pretty much everything a fellow poster has written I see no need.
I'm also reminded of a piece of advice given to me by a very wise man;
"you shouldn't wrestle a pig, you'll both get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
But I think you're wasting your breath.
Never a truer word spoken
It's funny how people always think you aren't listening to them when they don't like to address facts they can't refute.
I think the implication is that Sykes-Picot is important, but not important enough to be considered the start of a series of events, rather it's a continuation of them. Without meaning to put words in anyones mouth?"
Exactly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Modern-day Syria and Iraq both have antecedents in the pre-Islamic world. In the sixth century, the Arab tribal kingdom of the Ghassanids was located in much of the same area that is now Syria, while the Lakhmid kingdom was based in Iraq. These tribes fought each other as proxies for the two great world powers at the time: the Byzantines and Sassanians.
But it is more convenient to forget that it dates back to before any such concept as the west.
Even the 6th century was not the start of this, it goes back to even before Abraham was a lad."
How steamed up are you about what the Romans did? Still mad at the Italians, are you?
Being able to list ancient divisions does not mean they have any contemporary significance. The links are tenuous at best. On the other hand, the artificial divisions created in the region have clear and demonstrable lines of cause and effect to the present day.
Although I think I'm probably wasting my breath. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The significance is that it clearly illustrates that external politicking in a region has effects that will last many generations.
It should serve as a warning to the West that the only sensible course of action is to get out and leave the entire region well alone, as our involvement has only ever exacerbated things. We can see this through the last hundred years, at whatever point one chooses to look at.
Of course, like all warnings based in history, it will be ignored, and we will all suffer as a result."
When you see millions displaced.
People thrown from rooftops for their sexuality.
Children having their limbs chopped off as their parents won't convert.
People sold into sexual slavery.
And hundreds of other acts of savagery.
Do you honestly think the West should turn its back?
You say learn from History so why not learn from Rwanda the Balkans and the Holocaust?
I respect your stance but I think you are wrong and it's going to happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
As I agree with pretty much everything a fellow poster has written I see no need.
I'm also reminded of a piece of advice given to me by a very wise man;
"you shouldn't wrestle a pig, you'll both get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it.""
You come across as someone who has no real knowledge to convey, but simply wishes to be insulting because you are frustrated by your inability to articulate your opinions.
I hope you find some happiness. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Modern-day Syria and Iraq both have antecedents in the pre-Islamic world. In the sixth century, the Arab tribal kingdom of the Ghassanids was located in much of the same area that is now Syria, while the Lakhmid kingdom was based in Iraq. These tribes fought each other as proxies for the two great world powers at the time: the Byzantines and Sassanians.
But it is more convenient to forget that it dates back to before any such concept as the west.
Even the 6th century was not the start of this, it goes back to even before Abraham was a lad.
How steamed up are you about what the Romans did? Still mad at the Italians, are you?
Being able to list ancient divisions does not mean they have any contemporary significance. The links are tenuous at best. On the other hand, the artificial divisions created in the region have clear and demonstrable lines of cause and effect to the present day.
Although I think I'm probably wasting my breath."
So you do ignore all history prior to the bit that is convenient for your view point.
It's not anger at the Romans or the Greeks or the vikings.
It's about understanding that people use history to argue what they believe, rather than the truth that there are just some people in this world who want to be in charge and get others to do their bidding.
Some use religion, others use perceived historical claims, others use money.
In the end they are scum using force and brutality to get what they want. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath."
I think you're getting your panties in a twist.
I've just reread through the entire thread and can only see one place where you invited me to respond. I didn't get much of an education but I'm pretty sure "once" isn't equal to "repeatedly".
However, I'm sure you're as good at maths as you are at history and will work out that it's the fault of the west....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
As I agree with pretty much everything a fellow poster has written I see no need.
I'm also reminded of a piece of advice given to me by a very wise man;
"you shouldn't wrestle a pig, you'll both get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it."
You come across as someone who has no real knowledge to convey, but simply wishes to be insulting because you are frustrated by your inability to articulate your opinions.
I hope you find some happiness."
You come across as someone with too little knowledge to convey.
I'm really happy ta, thanks for the good wishes, appreciated but uneccesary. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
I think you're getting your panties in a twist.
I've just reread through the entire thread and can only see one place where you invited me to respond. I didn't get much of an education but I'm pretty sure "once" isn't equal to "repeatedly".
However, I'm sure you're as good at maths as you are at history and will work out that it's the fault of the west....
"
There have been several threads this weekend where you have been silent upon being asked to back up your spurious comments with facts...perhaps your memory is failing you?
However, you've demonstrated again you've nothing to add but unpleasantness, so I'll leave you to it. I hope you find comfort. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
I think you're getting your panties in a twist.
I've just reread through the entire thread and can only see one place where you invited me to respond. I didn't get much of an education but I'm pretty sure "once" isn't equal to "repeatedly".
However, I'm sure you're as good at maths as you are at history and will work out that it's the fault of the west....
There have been several threads this weekend where you have been silent upon being asked to back up your spurious comments with facts...perhaps your memory is failing you?
However, you've demonstrated again you've nothing to add but unpleasantness, so I'll leave you to it. I hope you find comfort."
I do apologise for not being at your beck and call.
I'm as comfortable as I am happy.
Again, my thanks, again uneccesary. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
I think you're getting your panties in a twist.
I've just reread through the entire thread and can only see one place where you invited me to respond. I didn't get much of an education but I'm pretty sure "once" isn't equal to "repeatedly".
However, I'm sure you're as good at maths as you are at history and will work out that it's the fault of the west....
There have been several threads this weekend where you have been silent upon being asked to back up your spurious comments with facts...perhaps your memory is failing you?
However, you've demonstrated again you've nothing to add but unpleasantness, so I'll leave you to it. I hope you find comfort.
I do apologise for not being at your beck and call.
I'm as comfortable as I am happy.
Again, my thanks, again uneccesary. "
You have both missed off the end of your posts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know as I'm obviously not aware of any history apart from prior to the British empire, but the ottoman empire had dealings in the Iraqi area for 400 years prior and it was still a war zone for those years.
But they probably blamed all those troubles on the Mongols who ruled before, who took over from the Muslim caliphate before them,Romans and Greeks before them etc.
But no it was probably all peace and roses until the British took over after WW1.
I agree. But I think you're wasting your breath.
If you agree, please feel free to refute my assertions.
Although, I've repeatedly invited you to do so, and you have been conspicuously silent...so I think I'm probably wasting my breath.
I think you're getting your panties in a twist.
I've just reread through the entire thread and can only see one place where you invited me to respond. I didn't get much of an education but I'm pretty sure "once" isn't equal to "repeatedly".
However, I'm sure you're as good at maths as you are at history and will work out that it's the fault of the west....
There have been several threads this weekend where you have been silent upon being asked to back up your spurious comments with facts...perhaps your memory is failing you?
However, you've demonstrated again you've nothing to add but unpleasantness, so I'll leave you to it. I hope you find comfort.
I do apologise for not being at your beck and call.
I'm as comfortable as I am happy.
Again, my thanks, again uneccesary.
You have both missed off the end of your posts. "
I didn't miss it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Anyway back on topic I don't think we have too much to worry about the press Isis get is actually way beyond their size.
Boko haram killed more people in 2014 than ISIS. But they don't have the twisted PR machine behind them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Anyway back on topic I don't think we have too much to worry about the press Isis get is actually way beyond their size.
Boko haram killed more people in 2014 than ISIS. But they don't have the twisted PR machine behind them."
That we can both agree on.
A sure sign that someone is an idiot is if they start talking about ISIS being an 'existential threat', 'the new Nazis', and the like.
Unfortunately the people saying this are often in charge of our country.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Anyway back on topic I don't think we have too much to worry about the press Isis get is actually way beyond their size.
Boko haram killed more people in 2014 than ISIS. But they don't have the twisted PR machine behind them.
That we can both agree on.
A sure sign that someone is an idiot is if they start talking about ISIS being an 'existential threat', 'the new Nazis', and the like.
Unfortunately the people saying this are often in charge of our country. "
But that is politics. They have to be seen to be doing something when a bomb goes off.
Oh fuck news has just come on, still want to bomb Syria.
I've no problem with wiping out ISIS, but then what? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Anyway back on topic I don't think we have too much to worry about the press Isis get is actually way beyond their size.
Boko haram killed more people in 2014 than ISIS. But they don't have the twisted PR machine behind them.
That we can both agree on.
A sure sign that someone is an idiot is if they start talking about ISIS being an 'existential threat', 'the new Nazis', and the like.
Unfortunately the people saying this are often in charge of our country.
But that is politics. They have to be seen to be doing something when a bomb goes off.
Oh fuck news has just come on, still want to bomb Syria.
I've no problem with wiping out ISIS, but then what?"
On that note, I did find it unsettling that "hundreds of arrests" of "known" extremists were made in the days after the attacks. I can't help wondering how many of those arrests were to make sure they were seen to be doing something. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Anyway back on topic I don't think we have too much to worry about the press Isis get is actually way beyond their size.
Boko haram killed more people in 2014 than ISIS. But they don't have the twisted PR machine behind them.
That we can both agree on.
A sure sign that someone is an idiot is if they start talking about ISIS being an 'existential threat', 'the new Nazis', and the like.
Unfortunately the people saying this are often in charge of our country.
But that is politics. They have to be seen to be doing something when a bomb goes off.
Oh fuck news has just come on, still want to bomb Syria.
I've no problem with wiping out ISIS, but then what?
On that note, I did find it unsettling that "hundreds of arrests" of "known" extremists were made in the days after the attacks. I can't help wondering how many of those arrests were to make sure they were seen to be doing something."
Quite likely.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
oops how did that happen? 
