isis

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 7 of 85 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Stirlingsays 29 Jul 14 7.17pm
Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 6.57pm You have hit a nail on the head, generally, about many of us. Do the ends justify the means or not? Are we against British military intervention/military aid in principle anywhere to help topple a repressive group/regime, or are we only opposed to it sometimes where it isn't against a regime/group we feel should be toppled, let alone all the grey areas in the middle? Many of us contradict ourselves when we take positions on issues like this, and that's not a "left" or a "right" thing... True, and a good summary of a difficult dilemma. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

29 Jul 14 7.17pm

Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 6.57pm

You have hit a nail on the head, generally, about many of us. Do the ends justify the means or not? Are we against British military intervention/military aid in principle anywhere to help topple a repressive group/regime, or are we only opposed to it sometimes where it isn't against a regime/group we feel should be toppled, let alone all the grey areas in the middle? Many of us contradict ourselves when we take positions on issues like this, and that's not a "left" or a "right" thing...

True, and a good summary of a difficult dilemma.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.23pm
Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder.We help topple the Israelis. ISIS later (after all Israel is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine.... But we shouldn't be trying to get one side or the other to 'win'. The ultimate aim should be a 2 state solution, which neither side seems to want at the moment. However, if outside arbitration or sanctions were genuinely neutral, then perhaps there'd be a better chance. Palestine issue among many, is the closed borders, particularly between Gaza and Egypt. That was not covered in the last treaty proposed which was why it was rejected. Would Hamas have ceased fire if the border was opened? Who knows, but unless it is posited... Of course the borders would have to be well manned, perhaps by the U. N.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.23pm

Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping?
I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East.

Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards .
What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny.
It is not the same as supporting the regime.
It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp.

Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder.We help topple the Israelis. ISIS later (after all Israel is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine....

But we shouldn't be trying to get one side or the other to 'win'. The ultimate aim should be a 2 state solution, which neither side seems to want at the moment.
However, if outside arbitration or sanctions were genuinely neutral, then perhaps there'd be a better chance.
Palestine issue among many, is the closed borders, particularly between Gaza and Egypt. That was not covered in the last treaty proposed which was why it was rejected. Would Hamas have ceased fire if the border was opened? Who knows, but unless it is posited...
Of course the borders would have to be well manned, perhaps by the U. N.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 29 Jul 14 7.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. So, you are in 'despair' at Isreali 'aggression'. However, you think that Saddam's attempted genocide of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs is better than giving the Iraqi people, as divided as they are, the ability to form their own future? Because mass slaughter by Saddam is more palatable? You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 29 Jul 14 7.32pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

So, you are in 'despair' at Isreali 'aggression'. However, you think that Saddam's attempted genocide of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs is better than giving the Iraqi people, as divided as they are, the ability to form their own future? Because mass slaughter by Saddam is more palatable?

You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.36pm
Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. So, you are in 'despair' at Isreali 'aggression'. However, you think that Saddam's attempted genocide of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs is better than giving the Iraqi people, as divided as they are, the ability to form their own future? Because mass slaughter by Saddam is more palatable? You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset. I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.36pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset.

I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 29 Jul 14 7.40pm
Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.36pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. So, you are in 'despair' at Isreali 'aggression'. However, you think that Saddam's attempted genocide of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs is better than giving the Iraqi people, as divided as they are, the ability to form their own future? Because mass slaughter by Saddam is more palatable? You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset. I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done. I knew you would take the distraction of the SWP jibe over answering the question. You are intellectually bankrupt Gusset. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 29 Jul 14 7.40pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.36pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset.

I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done.

I knew you would take the distraction of the SWP jibe over answering the question.

You are intellectually bankrupt Gusset.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 29 Jul 14 7.45pm
Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.23pm Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder.We help topple the Israelis. ISIS later (after all Israel is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine.... But we shouldn't be trying to get one side or the other to 'win'. The ultimate aim should be a 2 state solution, which neither side seems to want at the moment. However, if outside arbitration or sanctions were genuinely neutral, then perhaps there'd be a better chance. Palestine issue among many, is the closed borders, particularly between Gaza and Egypt. That was not covered in the last treaty proposed which was why it was rejected. Would Hamas have ceased fire if the border was opened? Who knows, but unless it is posited... Of course the borders would have to be well manned, perhaps by the U. N. My wording was sloppy, but the underlying point remains as an interesting one to think through Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder. We help get the Israelis out of West Bank/Gaza. ISIS later (after all Palestine is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine....
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

29 Jul 14 7.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.23pm

Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

My wording was sloppy, but the underlying point remains as an interesting one to think through

Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder. We help get the Israelis out of West Bank/Gaza. ISIS later (after all Palestine is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine....

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.50pm
Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.40pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.36pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. So, you are in 'despair' at Isreali 'aggression'. However, you think that Saddam's attempted genocide of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs is better than giving the Iraqi people, as divided as they are, the ability to form their own future? Because mass slaughter by Saddam is more palatable? You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset. I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done. I knew you would take the distraction of the SWP jibe over answering the question. You are intellectually bankrupt Gusset. Playing the man... Like I said, however unpalatable, I'd take the relative stability, even though I found it abhorrent, over the Pandoras box that has been opened. That is not the same as agreeing with it as everyone who reads these boards knows. Now go bother someone else.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.50pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.40pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.36pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 7.32pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

You need to stop reading SWP pamphlets and think for yourself Gusset.

I don't read SWP pamphlets as you well know. And once again you are playing the man. Well done.

I knew you would take the distraction of the SWP jibe over answering the question.

You are intellectually bankrupt Gusset.

Playing the man...
Like I said, however unpalatable, I'd take the relative stability, even though I found it abhorrent, over the Pandoras box that has been opened. That is not the same as agreeing with it as everyone who reads these boards knows.
Now go bother someone else.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.52pm
Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.45pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.23pm Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm And another thread is killed... ...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started. It is pathetic for you say anything different. Sorry did you say something that wasn't sniping? I stated earlier that u. S withdrawal left a power vacuum in Iraq. I asked whether this would have happened if saddam hadn't been deposed, which you took to mean that I supported saddam murdering people. And you call me thick. Mr my solution is to nuke the middle East. Gusset I have asked you repeatedly what was the alternative to Saddam being removed from power and you have said you don't know. So, therefore, you are against slaughter yet against removing those perpetuating slaughter. What do you propose for sorting out the Middle East, other than continually offering 'solidarity' and expressions of 'despair' at what is going on? Please tell us. As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke. And I have said the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is probably going to cause more problems for us in the West than not invading. The rise of ISIS will cause many problems This most likely is an unintended consequence. However many people did say that the invasion would cause issues afterwards . What I am saying is that having saddam keeping reigns on the various factions within a secular society where different religions lived is a lesser of two evils, however unpalatable it is because of his tyranny. It is not the same as supporting the regime. It's not a difficult standpoint to grasp. Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder.We help topple the Israelis. ISIS later (after all Israel is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine.... But we shouldn't be trying to get one side or the other to 'win'. The ultimate aim should be a 2 state solution, which neither side seems to want at the moment. However, if outside arbitration or sanctions were genuinely neutral, then perhaps there'd be a better chance. Palestine issue among many, is the closed borders, particularly between Gaza and Egypt. That was not covered in the last treaty proposed which was why it was rejected. Would Hamas have ceased fire if the border was opened? Who knows, but unless it is posited... Of course the borders would have to be well manned, perhaps by the U. N. My wording was sloppy, but the underlying point remains as an interesting one to think through Project it into Palestine Nick, its an interesting one to ponder. We help get the Israelis out of West Bank/Gaza. ISIS later (after all Palestine is part of the Levant) take over much of the whole area including Palestine.... It's a very difficult one and in some ways similar to the Iraq one. We need team America (f*** yeah)
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 7.52pm

Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 7.23pm

Quote legaleagle at 29 Jul 2014 7.14pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 6.54pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 6.28pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 29 Jul 2014 4.38pm

Quote nickgusset at 29 Jul 2014 4.36pm

And another thread is killed...

...because you can't finish, or won't finish , what you have started.

It is pathetic for you say anything different.

As for the nuke thing earlier, even a man of your intelligence could realise that was a joke.

My wording was sloppy, but the underlying point remains as an interesting one to think through

It's a very difficult one and in some ways similar to the Iraq one.
We need team America (f*** yeah)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 29 Jul 14 8.00pm
Bugger it....double post. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2014 8.05pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

29 Jul 14 8.00pm

Bugger it....double post.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2014 8.05pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 29 Jul 14 8.03pm
We might not like this ring wing Israeli government at the moment. People may be against Israeli actions......Rational arguments can be produced about the injustice of 47 (and it was). However, it's only fools who support the modern removal of Israel..Still fools can waffle all they like because no western government is ever going to back their anti Israeli rhetoric or back efforts to weaken it when it is surrounded by enemies. The alternative to Israel? Those who argue it would be a huge problems are right.....Undemocratic anti western extremists would rush to fill the void. Besides no outside agency could disband Israel without something like genocide, just as no outside agency could disband Iran for example. It would have to be hugely expensive and controversial and what would replace Israel? Not only that we would then have to deal with Jewish extremists to add to the Islamic ones we already have. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2014 8.04pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

29 Jul 14 8.03pm

We might not like this ring wing Israeli government at the moment. People may be against Israeli actions......Rational arguments can be produced about the injustice of 47 (and it was).

However, it's only fools who support the modern removal of Israel..Still fools can waffle all they like because no western government is ever going to back their anti Israeli rhetoric or back efforts to weaken it when it is surrounded by enemies.

The alternative to Israel? Those who argue it would be a huge problems are right.....Undemocratic anti western extremists would rush to fill the void.

Besides no outside agency could disband Israel without something like genocide, just as no outside agency could disband Iran for example.

It would have to be hugely expensive and controversial and what would replace Israel? Not only that we would then have to deal with Jewish extremists to add to the Islamic ones we already have.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2014 8.04pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 29 Jul 14 8.05pm
Damn it....I burnt my Cornish pasty. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

29 Jul 14 8.05pm

Damn it....I burnt my Cornish pasty.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 8.05pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jul 2014 8.00pm We might not like this ring wing Israeli government at the moment. People may be against Israeli actions......Rational arguments can be produced about the injustice of 47 (and it was). However, it's only fools who support the modern removal of Israel..Still fools can waffle all they like because no western government is ever going to back their anti Israeli rhetoric or back efforts to weaken it when it is surrounded by enemies. The alternative to Israel? Matt is right. Besides no outside agency could disband Israel without something like genocide, just as no outside agency could disband Iran for example. It would have to be hugely expensive and controversial and what would replace Israel? Not only that we would then have to deal with Jewish extremists to add to the Islamic ones we already have. I don't think anyone has asked for Israel to be disbanded. There are plenty of people there who agree that Palestine has a right to sovereign state and self determination, as there are many in Palestine who could coexist with Israel next door.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Jul 14 8.05pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jul 2014 8.00pm

We might not like this ring wing Israeli government at the moment. People may be against Israeli actions......Rational arguments can be produced about the injustice of 47 (and it was).

The alternative to Israel? Matt is right.

Besides no outside agency could disband Israel without something like genocide, just as no outside agency could disband Iran for example.

It would have to be hugely expensive and controversial and what would replace Israel? Not only that we would then have to deal with Jewish extremists to add to the Islamic ones we already have.

I don't think anyone has asked for Israel to be disbanded. There are plenty of people there who agree that Palestine has a right to sovereign state and self determination, as there are many in Palestine who could coexist with Israel next door.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 7 of 85 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

isis

Site Map

Sponsors