Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
If this is proven.........
41 Answers
what do you think our response should be?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nedflanders. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
'pull out of iraq'
And let iraq explode in total anarchy, civil war and total chaos, or yes that would be a clever thing to do. i can see it now if the us and britain pulled out, the same people who advocate surrender to al-zakawi and his messianic cult of death, will suddenly start accusing bush and blair of caving in to the terrorists and leaving the iraqi people in their hour of need!!
As to the original question, due to the complete failures of the intelligence agencies over the weapons of mass destruction issue, both blair and to a lesser extent bush can do very little as regards iran, except for maybe the threat of sanctions and verbal warnings..
Declare war on Iran. If they want a Jihad who do you think will win when we have Israel in the middle of it all, the expertise of the British Forces, the money and balls of The Yanks and probably backing from Russia and China.
We will whoop their ar5es in about 1 month and finally rid the world of evil Islamic terrorists.
gevs thankyou for your structured criticism. An idiot?? maybe, maybe not. But I fail to see where my arguement falls into idiocy.
Typical of a work shy left wing do-gooder like yourself. Insult folk but have no backup.
I see you speak English and not German or French, so you are living proof that war is good. Also "idiot" comes from theLlatin "Idiocrum". Due to this being Latin I would assume you adhere in some way (not necessiarly belief) to Christianity.
Now I know there are some big words here for you but try to understand.
My view that war is a good thing does not make me an idiot. It is my opinion. If your own opinion falls below that of dole bludging layabout who goes on pathetic demos to save some Ubekistani refugee I suggest you keep comments to yourself. '
nuff said. If you reply my case is proven. so there.
I will reply just in order to completely disprove your so called case. To keep things simple for your narrow mind I'll break it down as you address each issue in your former post.
I am not a work shy left wing do gooder. I have a good job and work hard to be successful in it and if I had to classify my political stance it would probably be just right of centre. All of your posts across the entirity of this forum showing your right wing (borderline facist) views are all the back up I need to be able to call you an idiot with a fair degree of accuracy. Your reference to war through what languages I speak (which include French and German by the way) only highlight the idiocy of your previous comments advocating a holy war. The wars you indirectly refer to were of a completely different nature and circumstances. If you can't see the differences yourself and need to know why then I suggest you get yourself an historical and sociological education. I probably do adhere to christianity in some respects but no more than the next man in a traditionally christian country. Don't worry about using big words, the chances are you are having more trouble with them than I am, but thanks for your concern!
cont...
... thinking we would have the military backing of Russia and China only highlights further your ignorance to the actual situation at hand and by thinking we would win within a month if that was the case just stupifies me! If indeed we were to have your holy war or the "jihad" Islamic extremists would wish for just by sheer population numbers alone this would be a catastrophic event across the globe lasting a hell of a lot longer than a month with perhaps centuries of repercussions.
The Islamic terorists still only represent the minority of Islamic followers around the world so tarring them all with the same brush is hardly appropriate is it.
Hang on actually you are right. I apologise, you are not an idiot. You are a war mongering fool.
Now now chaps, time out! Ok gevs666 (1966 was a bad year!) Can you give me your opinion on what our response should be if the intelligence is correct and proven beyond all doubt?
Zen - Give me an reasoned answer cos you know as well as I that we are not pulling out for a while! Do you suggest diplomacy?
When you say our -I think response should be as follows:
To those who were against the war from the beginning: response "I told you so"
To those who were pro war: "I'm afraid you can't cook an omelette without breaking eggs"
To the facists among us: "Lets nuke them and all the surrounding countries and anyone who disagrees with us"
To others who were prowar: "it takes time for the peace protest to conclude"
To others who were antiwar: "Surely this article is an excuse to go to war with Iraq"
So, just to check understanding, the question is seeking views on whether it is acceptable for one government to train, equip or otherwise give covert assistance to foriegn nationals knowing that this training will be used to destabilise the existing regime of the trainees through terrorist activity?
ned It's an extremely hard one to call.
Ultimately pressure will be needed to be put on the Iranian government through all diplomatic channels available to us. This could mean reduction in economic aid or even going as far actually placing trade and economic sanctions upon them. This however would need the full backing of the UN for it to be truly effective. As it stands now that full backing would be unlikely to come due to the way in which this problem has arisen.
The issue could well be decided on our ability to gain substantial support from within the UN itself before we put any proposals forward for solution.
Declaring war (whilst being very much a last resort) on a country overseas with a greater population than our own, with our resources stretched as far as they are at the moment would obviously not be a favourable option at the best of times. If you put this together with the following. The fact they have more "friends" than us in the surrounding area. The fact they have the political sense and means to turn this into something it isn't (a holy war) to get backing from these "friends" if needed. The potential they have for nuclear weapons development. I would think this would not be a favourable option even as a last resort.
Unfortunately it may actually have to be a case of putting pressure on the Iranian government to help us invetigate the situation whilst trying to "ride out the storm" of the inevitable insurgent attacks until some form of stability inside Iraq has been achieved. Not ideal but when you consider the alternatives.....
Sorry ned - you say this is a simple question, just wanted to clarify a couple of things:
when you say "our response", exactly who do you mean - the governments, the opositions, public opinion, the UN, the US, Europe, MI6, the SAS or me and my mates down the pub?
And when you say "if this is proven...", do you mean proven in a court of law, by the attorney general, by MI5, by some people in Washington, by the circus known as the media or by admission of Iranian spies?
Then speaking as someone who was against the war in Iraq, I feel that we must try all peaceful and diplomatic ways of aleviating the situation and hopefully the worst it would get to would be sanctions against Iran. Sadly though, it may have to end with more bloodshed and a war which noone will win.
A bit of a catch 22 situation. I really hate the fact that we went into Iraq, however, I don't feel that we should just take our troops out and leave it to them. If it is proven in a sensible court (and not some whitewash) that Iran is involved in helping terrorsits, then I feel we have to shut down the terrorist training camp with or without the help of the Iranian government. If Iran try to stop us, then sadly I forsee world war 3.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
