Should US "Allies" Be Attacked?

[Ted Striker]

Wiglaf,

You understand NOTHING about politics.

It's politics that drives the world.

You can have the most powerful military force on Earth, but it is useless without popular support of the people.

Even Rome needed allies.

I suggest when you're old enough to go to high school or college, you take a basic poli sci class.

[rev]

The people don't want to see british bombs, they won't see british bombs.

Gee, maybe that has something to do with Blair's administration not releasing photographs of the Brits in action?

[Clear Skies]

Despite the results of the poll, I think it should be obvious to everyone here that Wiglaf and his tiny 'army' of supporters are so massively in the minority here that it's actually laughable. Therefore, it should be easy to deduce that, since they know their 'views' cause outrage and massive dissent, they're doing it only for the attention.

They thrive on it. Sad individuals like them don't listen to reasoned argument. They seriously need psychological help, and I for one hope they get it. Soon.

Back on topic, I'd like to thank Ted Striker, H Tower, Immortal Wombat, Stefu and everyone else who has worked so hard to refute Wiglaf's insane arguments. Let's all remember that in less humane and tolerant times he would have probably been taken out and shot.

Isn't that a nice thought?

[Wiglaf]

Whereas Bush doesn't give a damn about the politics, and will get himself into political sh!t? I think not. This war is intensly political, and Blair's job of getting the rest of the Muslim world to go along with you bombing one of the world's poorest nations to hell has been bloody hard work, whilst Bush sits on his ass eating donuts.

Military Tribunals and food drops have pissed off a lot of people. So did the Red Cross/commie supply line bombings. Blair, OTOH, is taking the political route and going with the flow. He hasn't done anything out of the ordinary at all.

In a situation like Afghanistan, peacekeeping is the hard job, not sitting in B-52's and dropping bombs.

You've flown a B-52 before?

Gee, maybe that has something to do with Blair's administration not releasing photographs of the Brits in action?

They haven't been in action...NOWHERE has it been proven British planes or troops are currently fighting it out in Afghanistan.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Military Tribunals and food drops have pissed off a lot of people.

and have been exactly what others want. Bush's ratings have gone up, he's obviously at least considering the political implications of what he is doing. Food drops are all good, and I can see military tribunals appealing to some of you Americans...

Blair, OTOH, is taking the political route and going with the flow. He hasn't done anything out of the ordinary at all.

Apart from risking looking like an idiot in Syria and elsewhere to drum up support for your president.
If he wanted to not help, he could have done a lot less.

You've flown a B-52 before?

No. You've overseen a non-combat operation to control in-fighting between a dozen warring factions who are trying to take over the power vacuum that is Afghanistan? Tried to keep more innocent people from being killed by other people simply because they don't agree with how the Taliban should be replaced? Destruction is a lot easier than construction. The guy who operates a wrecking ball has a easier time than the architect who has to rebuild the house from the pieces.

They haven't been in action...NOWHERE has it been proven British planes or troops are currently fighting it out in Afghanistan.

NOWHERE have you refuted the claim that Bush declined their support. They're on call. YOU DIDNT WANT THEM, maybe even didnt need them. They were there.

And answer the rest of my post dammit, or admit your points were wrong.

[Wiglaf]

and have been exactly what others want. Bush's ratings have gone up, he's obviously at least considering the political implications of what he is doing. Food drops are all good, and I can see military tribunals appealing to some of you Americans...

The tribunals aren't going over well with most democrats in congress ATM.

Apart from risking looking like an idiot in Syria and elsewhere to drum up support for your president.
If he wanted to not help, he could have done a lot less.

He wanted to keep himself intact politically, that's all. The meeting in Syria and other countries in the region accomplished little else.

No. You've overseen a non-combat operation to control in-fighting between a dozen warring factions who are trying to take over the power vacuum that is Afghanistan? Tried to keep more innocent people from being killed by other people simply because they don't agree with how the Taliban should be replaced? Destruction is a lot easier than construction.

It's not like Britain is putting the country together, IW. They haven't done anything on that front either. Besides, say what you want, the dirty work is being handled by the US.

NOWHERE have you refuted the claim that Bush declined their support. They're on call. YOU DIDNT WANT THEM, maybe even didnt need them. They were there.

Bush knew Blair wouldn't want to give the green light. Those troops were never intended for fighting...

And answer the rest of my post dammit, or admit your points were wrong.

The rest assumed I was asking for WWIII, which really isn't the case.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
The tribunals aren't going over well with most democrats in congress ATM.

So of your four points, one of them isn't for Bush's political gain. This make Allied support worthless how?

He wanted to keep himself intact politically, that's all. The meeting in Syria and other countries in the region accomplished little else.

So we've gone from "no-one wanted to see British bombs" to "Blair keeping himslef intact by aiding the war effort" genius

It's not like Britain is putting the country together, IW. They haven't done anything on that front either. Besides, say what you want, the dirty work is being handled by the US.

...because they won't let us help.

Bush knew Blair wouldn't want to give the green light. Those troops were never intended for fighting...

In your opinion. Who cares if they were or not? Is that any cause to bomb us? To declare war on us because Bush didn't want to use our troops. Time for a reality check Wiggy.

The rest assumed I was asking for WWIII, which really isn't the case.

Silly me, assuming that anyone would mind you declaring war on Canada, UK, Saudi, Germany, France, Japan et al for no good reason.

[Wiglaf]

So of your four points, one of them isn't for Bush's political gain. This make Allied support worthless how?

It doesn't by itself make foreign support useless, but it does show that Bush isn't politically motivated. He's guided by morals and goals.

So we've gone from "no-one wanted to see British bombs" to "Blair keeping himslef intact by aiding the war effort" genius

No we didn't. I said Blair WASN'T aiding the war effort. Really, what has he done down in Syria that made such a difference?

.because they won't let us help.

proof? link? something?

In your opinion. Who cares if they were or not? Is that any cause to bomb us? To declare war on us because Bush didn't want to use our troops. Time for a reality check Wiggy.

It warrants a stern warning and a drop of the alliance and all political and economic connections, for sure.

[H Tower]

dropping all economic ties with england? are you quite mad wiglaf?! the economy is already in bad shape, why do you want to make it worse?

its a good thing bush doesn't think like you, we would have no friends and no economy worthy of the word.

[Provost Harrison]

Wiglaf, read what people are saying to you because you are running around in circles chasing your own tail. You have missed the point, you have failed to take onboard any new information. If someone doesn't agree with you, you use that age-old post-McCarthyist technique (like Bob Dornan and his ilk) of just calling them commies. Do you actually know what communism means or what a communist stands for, really?

You're an insult. If you would engage in a rational debate, OK, but you are an irritating schoolchild who is constantly being told of and chastised and still claim that you are in control. Get a life

[Shi Huangdi]

I hope you realize that Wiglaf is probably a DL troll sitting at his computer laughing at your replies.

[Immortal Wombat]

*sigh*
right, so Bush is entirely motivated by morals. Good for him.
Blair is obviously pandering to public opinion by making the same decisions as Bush. Where Bush is right, Blair is a sheep. gotcha
Blair did nothing to help in the Middle East, or in India. Bush could have acted entirely without him, safe in the knowledge he had world support. (International Coalition against terrorism, all by yourself )
Our troops are there for show, we haven't done anything militarily of worth since the Falklands, or perhaps even 1942. You're dead right. Bush was pleading for our support, but Blair wouldn't endanger our troops by putting them in combat situations. Peacekeeping is the woosies job for after the real men have left the country in ruins.

Originally posted by Wiglaf
It warrants a stern warning and a drop of the alliance and all political and economic connections, for sure.

Of course, I now see entirely your point. We didn't help, we are as bad as the Taliban. Drop the alliance, you dont need anyone else, 1920's isolationism worked miracle for American economy. Unless we support you wholeheartedly in future, then saction us, you dont need our goods, we are far too reliant on you. Lets descent into the Middle Ages again, and live our happy little lives.
And then, when you have severed connections enough, the next time something like this happens, we will forget your arrogance, and spring willingly to your side, donate our entire economy to your frigging war effort, for the sole purpose of licking your president's butt-hole.
USA!!! USA!!! USA!!!

[shade]

Originally posted by Assur
Attack Belgium!

Every worldwar the Flemish become more ^powerfull in Belgium!

It(s our Eurocom spîrit

56 years of peace !

too long!

bomb bomb bomb!

Yeah right,plz leave it ,almost 50% of the European wars from the last 2000 years were fought here,It really is time to give us some peace and quiet.Let us(here in flandres) become strong and we will take over the world in a gentle way,no more wars only trade and education(although this might be a to high standard for some )

Shade

[KrazyHorse]

If you didn't want wars fought in your territory maybe you shouldn't have chosen to locate yourselves between the French and the Germans.

[shade]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
If you didn't want wars fought in your territory maybe you shouldn't have chosen to locate yourselves between the French and the Germans.

how do you think Belgium came into existance???
first there was the Frankisch empire(not sure still correct through translation) that contained Spain,France,benelux,Germany,Switzerland,...
this was split up in France,Spain,some other stuff(part 1)
Germany and all above(part 2) and then there was the part in between=>benelux,switzerland,Italy
=>ie we were caught in the middle of problems since north and south didn't like oneanother and always wanted to fight.
(btw this is the best place on Earth to live that's why all are fighting here not because they hate oneanother

Shade