Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Why Don't We Just Let These Loonies Kill Each Other?
62 Answers
http://
We should order a news blackout, get anything we have out and let them get on with it. The whole sorry *** h0le is not worth one more drop of bl00d, it's not worth even putting on the news, the last thing we should do is send troops there, I don't care!
We should order a news blackout, get anything we have out and let them get on with it. The whole sorry *** h0le is not worth one more drop of bl00d, it's not worth even putting on the news, the last thing we should do is send troops there, I don't care!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. 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.
I support innaction because I know we won't ever do what is actually necessary. Sending half a dozen troops with a strongly worded letter won't do it. We need to treat this like D Day and we won't because it'll upset Gromit and co in his Islington coffee shop. So the alternative is to defend ourselves.
Will someone tell me what action they think the western world should take?
Will someone tell me what action they think the western world should take?
mikey4444
/// AOG,,,we are allowed to disagree with you and anybody else, if we want to. When you are right, I agree with you, as I have done in the past. But when you are wrong, I reserve the right to do the opposite. Stop being paranoid just because somebody questions your stance on issues. ///
Hang on there old fellow, who said I was at all paranoid if someone questions my stance on issues, in fact I encourage it if it is in reasonable and valid opposition.
That is what debating is all about, not just dismissing other's point of view out of hand, but trying to put up a good enough argument to try and convince your opponents that your argument is more valid than their own.
To get back to your outburst however, Gromit accused a fellow ABer or others of supporting an extreme Islamic state, then you intervened by asking who that comment was aimed at, and I said "All those who disagree with Gromit.
A valid response don't you think? And no need whatsoever to link your name with that of Gromit's, except of course if you just enjoy any opportunity to take a personal dig at 'yours truly'?
/// AOG,,,we are allowed to disagree with you and anybody else, if we want to. When you are right, I agree with you, as I have done in the past. But when you are wrong, I reserve the right to do the opposite. Stop being paranoid just because somebody questions your stance on issues. ///
Hang on there old fellow, who said I was at all paranoid if someone questions my stance on issues, in fact I encourage it if it is in reasonable and valid opposition.
That is what debating is all about, not just dismissing other's point of view out of hand, but trying to put up a good enough argument to try and convince your opponents that your argument is more valid than their own.
To get back to your outburst however, Gromit accused a fellow ABer or others of supporting an extreme Islamic state, then you intervened by asking who that comment was aimed at, and I said "All those who disagree with Gromit.
A valid response don't you think? And no need whatsoever to link your name with that of Gromit's, except of course if you just enjoy any opportunity to take a personal dig at 'yours truly'?
/what's your solution? /
Do the minimum (supplies, air strikes, special forces)
the only justification for more interference would be a prompt (such as a direct attack on our home territories) for the massive commitment from USA (and Rest of West) needed to wipe out the extremists and install secure, moderate governance across the region.
Do the minimum (supplies, air strikes, special forces)
the only justification for more interference would be a prompt (such as a direct attack on our home territories) for the massive commitment from USA (and Rest of West) needed to wipe out the extremists and install secure, moderate governance across the region.
Don't be silly AOG. We mostly disagree but sometimes we don't and when we don't, I give you just credit.
On the issue of IS, its a case of people are either with them or against them.
Its too serious an issue to remain non-committal on, not that I am accusing you of doing so. But inaction will just allow IS to continue the slaughter unchecked and I take the view that to do that is counter-productive for everyone.
On the issue of IS, its a case of people are either with them or against them.
Its too serious an issue to remain non-committal on, not that I am accusing you of doing so. But inaction will just allow IS to continue the slaughter unchecked and I take the view that to do that is counter-productive for everyone.
No you can't polish one TTT, but you can put glitter on it!
Personally I believe the only way to sort this whole sorry mess will be to pile in guns blazing. Except we wont be allowed will we, as in Afghanistan we have to wait until one of them shoots us first or other such nonsense to appease the peaceniks in their Islington coffee shops.
In addition we need to take a firm hand here, internment for families of those that have gone to fight or who show dissent to the UK.
But we won't so I have to agree TTT, inaction is the only course as anything less willbe catastrophic for us.
Personally I believe the only way to sort this whole sorry mess will be to pile in guns blazing. Except we wont be allowed will we, as in Afghanistan we have to wait until one of them shoots us first or other such nonsense to appease the peaceniks in their Islington coffee shops.
In addition we need to take a firm hand here, internment for families of those that have gone to fight or who show dissent to the UK.
But we won't so I have to agree TTT, inaction is the only course as anything less willbe catastrophic for us.
Some will never learn, we have recently withdrawn from another dusty hell hole, that being Afghanistan after 13 years of bloody conflict and at the cost of 453 British lives and countless life long injuries, and what did we achieve? The Taliban still exists and will soon be back.
At that time we were given a multitude of excuses for our involvement, from stopping the growing of opium poppies, capturing Osama bin Laden, to avenge the 0/11 attacks, so that their women will have a chance at education and the same one as they are still using today over our involvement in Iraq, that being to make the streets of Britain safe.
At that time we were given a multitude of excuses for our involvement, from stopping the growing of opium poppies, capturing Osama bin Laden, to avenge the 0/11 attacks, so that their women will have a chance at education and the same one as they are still using today over our involvement in Iraq, that being to make the streets of Britain safe.
AOG - once again we are in complete agreement.
The lack of clarity in our entrance stategy (there wasn't an exit strategy!) when we first commenced this futile miliary action simply means that the poor families of fallen soliders have no clear reason for why their children / fathers / brothers / sisters died, and that is just about the biggest heartbreak of all.
The lack of clarity in our entrance stategy (there wasn't an exit strategy!) when we first commenced this futile miliary action simply means that the poor families of fallen soliders have no clear reason for why their children / fathers / brothers / sisters died, and that is just about the biggest heartbreak of all.
mikey4444
/// But inaction will just allow IS to continue the slaughter unchecked and I take the view that to do that is counter-productive for everyone. ///
So you agreed at us going into Iraq to defeat Saddam Hussain, and into Afghanistan to stop the Taliban's slaughter there?
What about all those other African nations, some who are slaughtering Christians and Homosexuals, should we also send troops in there?
/// But inaction will just allow IS to continue the slaughter unchecked and I take the view that to do that is counter-productive for everyone. ///
So you agreed at us going into Iraq to defeat Saddam Hussain, and into Afghanistan to stop the Taliban's slaughter there?
What about all those other African nations, some who are slaughtering Christians and Homosexuals, should we also send troops in there?
mikey - "But inaction will just allow IS to continue the slaughter unchecked and I take the view that to do that is counter-productive for everyone."
I would agree that action is required - but bull-headed scattergun un-planned military action has proved more than once that this is not the action that is required - it has singularly failed to achieve any of the advised objectives.
As I have said before many times on debates about these conflicts, sadly i do not know what the response should be, but i definitely know what the response should not be!
I would agree that action is required - but bull-headed scattergun un-planned military action has proved more than once that this is not the action that is required - it has singularly failed to achieve any of the advised objectives.
As I have said before many times on debates about these conflicts, sadly i do not know what the response should be, but i definitely know what the response should not be!
Latest Posts
News14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles49 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles63 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.