Should US "Allies" Be Attacked?

[History049]

I agree, the "allies" deserve some terrorist attack. Kinda forcing them into helping us. there have been NO british casualities so far.

[Wiglaf]

BC: What has Blair done? Colorful cheeks, interviews and handshakes with no name idiots. Not much else.

NO ONE has provided a rational response as to why we should hold off on a retaliation effort against the UK or Canada. Not one person. As I expected.

[Asher]

Maybe you guys don't hear about this kind of stuff in the States, but the Americans are telling everyone else to basically back off. They don't want the Australians to do this or that, they don't want the Canadians to do anything but logisitical support, etc.

Let's face it, you don't need the help.
What you do need is the 'diplomatic' backing of it from the other nations in the world. You've got that.

You want us to help more?
Well, maybe we'd be more willing to help if you didn't get yourself into this mess in the first place by meddling around with the affairs of other countries just to further your own interests.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
NO ONE has provided a rational response as to why we should hold off on a retaliation effort against the UK or Canada. Not one person. As I expected.

How about this: We're not the arrogant superpower bulleying everyone around.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
NO ONE has provided a rational response as to why we should hold off on a retaliation effort against the UK or Canada. Not one person. As I expected.

You want the entire world to declare war on the US?


I fail to see how you can berate the British for not employing more troops and missiles, when the US armed forces and senior government have said that we are not required at this time. We have put the troops at your disposal, but the US has chosen not to use them.

[History049]

More than anything, you need it. You've gotten arrogant and greedy. Time to wakeup, if there is no way than there is one left.

[Wiglaf]

You want the entire world to declare war on the US?

God forbid they actually deploy troops.

How about this: We're not the arrogant superpower bulleying everyone around.

We asked for help, we didn't get it. Obviously we are doing all the work quite well now on our own, to your benefit btw, but that's no reason to forget this kind of outrageous insult. Some kind of economical or military damage must result, until I hear a good reason otherwise.

Those who aren't with us are against us, and 'with us' is REALLY going in the UK, Canada's, etc favor right now. Bush should give a stern warning, and quick. ANYTHING to get those rebel countries back in line.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

LOLOLOLOLOL

I love message boards...people can say whatever they want, true or not, and no one can tell them not to.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
We asked for help, we didn't get it.

Christ Wiglaf, wake up.
You did get it, you turned it all down.

I've seen prissy little girls with more balls and intellect than you.

Those who aren't with us are against us, and 'with us' is REALLY going in the UK, Canada's, etc favor right now. Bush should give a stern warning, and quick. ANYTHING to get those rebel countries back in line.

Bush WOULD do that, but he'd look awful stupid. After all, he's sitting here turning down all of these offers for help, then turning around and warning people to help out more?

That's something mothers do.

[Wiglaf]

The commie (yes, it's true) leaders of rouge nations like Canada or Britain are concerned ONLY about the politics of this operation. Casualites in America's war would NOT go over well with the brits in the UK (pansy peacedoves). None of them want this war, neither does that PR machine Blair.

Of course, if anything ever happens to the UK from the Taliban or bin Laden, they'll be sending people off like mad.

[Faeelin]

I'm disgusted this stirred debate. Bush meant "You either help us, or help the terrorists. Choose now."

He didn't mean that countries who did minimal aid would be nuked into oblivion.

[Asher]

Nice avoidance of the main issue with another troll, Wiglaf.

[Wiglaf]

the main issue (we were turning down the help) was addressed, glonky.

and faeelin, if you help the terrorists (which by odd coincidence is NOT the same as helping us), then yeah, you should be "nuked into oblivion". ok?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
the main issue (we were turning down the help) was addressed, glonky.

Exactly, the main issue is you said people aren't helping. We offered, you turned it down.

Your beef is with Bush, then, go start an anti-Bush commie thread and go nuts.

[Wiglaf]

My post covered why the aid never came.

" leaders of rouge nations like Canada or Britain are concerned ONLY about the politics of this operation. Casualites in America's war would NOT go over well with the brits in the UK (pansy peacedoves). None of them want this war"

that immediatly puts into question motive. it is suspicous that the UK and Canada haven't fired off a shot, isn't it? I don't care what you say Bush has refused, I've seen him at the UN demanding more help from other countries. communists and terrorists if they fail to listen.

"Of course, if anything ever happens to the UK from the Taliban or bin Laden, they'll be sending people off like mad. "

I'm right there. No questions asked.