Police warrant

Its true.

But I never agreed to invasion of Afghanistan....carpet bombing villages on the off chance of killing some Al Quaeda terrorists isnt a great strategy....and on the ground it is unwinable, USSR proved that in 1979. Learn from history's mistakes.



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

WEll anyway i didnt read much but i do agree with ellis


I dont think UK should get involved with Iraq just yet. Afghanistan, yes, no choice there, but not Iraq just yet

See, they had no choice with afghanistan, they had to air bomb first. No way any gorund troops would have a hope in hell of winning without the air strikes first.

Now, air strikes have almost finished really, and ground troops have been in for a good while now.

This is nothing agsaisnt the americans, but i dont think it will be the yanks who find him, if anybody does. They are not well enough trained or prepeared for the terrany, whilst the british SAS are.

IF anyone finds Osama, alive, it will be the SAS IMO.




Racing Is Life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting
Jesus may be able to heal the sick and bring the dead back to life, but he can't do shît for low fps

I think it'll be the americans. Delta Force have the support, funding and technology that the MoD just do not give the SAS (ever read Bravo Two Zero? Its shown well there) and the americans have a greater motivation to find him. Having said that, there is no doubt that the SAS and SBS are the best special forces regiments in the world.

In the end, it doesnt matter who finds him, as long as he is found....and I think he will be.
I realise air strikes are necessary, but what I am against is the bombing of civilian targets in the blind hope that terrorists lived in that village. Strategic, well researched analysis of possible hideouts would have been more useful, but the american people wanted to see action taken immediately.



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

Just one question (not intended to offend members of the forum I consider my friends):
WHO THE F*CK CARES??

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

lol Vader you're right in a way. If they are going to do something, do it. Not sit round, giving speeches filled with cheesy metaphors and cliches and ultimately still do nothing about the situation. I was fairly interested until six hundred years later and they are still in a mess about what to do.



Visit my website [www.mrears.com]

Knot eye.

Vader the thing that really piss me off is that we (the western world) chased Osama and his buddy Omar after what they did, but we still treat a criminal like them (Arafat) in white gloves like he was a perfect gentleman and maybe an hero too.
Definitely Ebrews casualties seem worth much less than American ones, and I find this disgusting.
Not to mention that we had Arafat's terrorists srtiking here in Europe in the past...3 times just here in Italy.

yeah i dont like Bush, but i dont want any terrorist stuff agaianst him

I can see where you're coming from - but he reacted superbly to the terrorist attacks. He showed that he could handled possibly one of America's most difficult situations since the missile crisis. And he did it without any bullshit. Previous to September 11th, I would have considered him a bit of a fool, but he credited himself and I respected him a lot more.

Just one question (not intended to offend members of the forum I consider my friends):
WHO THE F*CK CARES??

You're right, we shouldn't really care. But as long as he is not known to be dead, for all we know he could send a few more airliners into more skyscrapers.




HISTORIC BTCC VIDEOS

And just think, the Bin Laden family used to sponsor Williams GP a few years back! It's scary to think they had something to do with what is probably the highest profile sport in the world, and the sport we all love.




HISTORIC BTCC VIDEOS

I tend to be careful with my judgement. The decision if someone is a freedom fighter or a terrorist is just a matter of from which side you look at things. Take Iraq for example. What do they blame Hussein and his regime for?
1. Possession/development of chemical and probaly nuclear weapons
2. Violation of human rights
Now look at the US of A. What about their weapons? What about human rights (just think about the fact that they even execute mentally handicapped, or that they can arrest a 10(!!!) year old boy because he watched his 6(!!!)sister year old sister peeing due to sexual harassment)
Where is the difference? Okay USA claims to be a democracy, but Saddam wouldn't call himself an evil dictator either. THe difference is that we (the western world) did chose to stand on the US side, not the Arabian.

If we want to judge what is going on in parts (!!) Arabia, if we feel morally obliged to intervene when Iraq does invade Kuwait, who does point the finger at the Americans for what they have done to the natives amerivcan indians or balck negro slaves? Who does blame UK for their violent policy of colonisation in India or Africa? Who says that all Spanish people were terrorists, just because their conquistadores killed countless numbers of Indios? Who does blame Germany ...err...no, that's no good example, since we are always to blame.

Did Fidel Castro free his country from fascist bourgoisie or did he unrightfully invade Cuba to oppress its inhabtants?

Why are Americans (likewise most other occidental countries) firm believers in Chrisanity - and are willing to protect western culture where Christanity is a vital part of - and still do not heed the first principles of this religion: to forgive and forget?

Why is it, that it is always the other side who has got terrorist, whereas we have glorious freedom fighters? Peacekeeping force is already a contradiction in itself, but it this kind of sloppy dialectics that we alwaya are ready to use as a weak excuse whenever we try to follow our own interests in world policy and global economics. Tell me why should anyone be interested to protect the Kuwait regime? Just for the sake of human rights? After all their chiefs are not actually known to have invented democracy. Yes, there is good life in Kuwait as long as you do not stand in the way of the royal family. But liberty and justice for all in Kuwait - no way. Without letting this go to far, the driving force behind this facrce is obvious: the power of the capital trying to get its way and woe to those aho get in its way. The funny thing about this is that you do need communism to see it like this, just common sense.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

forgive the typos and bad syntax, I was a bit ... well ... affected when I typed it.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

And no, I am no enemy of the USA, since I do not really like these stereotypes.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

Why is it, that it is always the other side who has got terrorist, whereas we have glorious freedom fighters?

Because our freedom fighters don't rape women, execute women on football pitches as a show, they don't fly airliners into skyscrapers with the sole intent of murdering thousands of innocent people. These people are terrorists. To be honest, I'm not particularly well informed about the situation in Iraq. What I know is that Hussein is in possession of big weapons that he probably shouldn't have for the better of the world.




HISTORIC BTCC VIDEOS

My main issue with the iraq invasion is that we have no proof that he still has these weapons....obviously if he wont let the UN in, we can't know.



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

Because our freedom fighters don't rape women

I heard other stories about the white "soldier" man on his peacekeeping tasks in Africa. What about Vietnam? Did all these countless women asked to be raped by the civilized western man? Besides, it is all part of the propaganda not to tell you how "our heroes" behave on a night out, how many soldier are actually fascists, etc. We may not do it on football fields, but we do it (faked though) on the big screen for our entertainment.
As for murdering innocent people - again, what about Vietnam? Is it not part of our history, yes even of our western culture to go out and rape and kill all and everything that is not up the next tree on a count of three? This has ever been so, even before the first crusader went east to go and kill some Arabs. I don't have to meation Conquistadores, Slavery, Colonisation, etc. again Just because we have a record of being pacifists for the last 50 years or so - after virtually covering mother earth with the blood of our "distant cousins" - we should be very careful with what we say about other cultures.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

I was'nt aware we were talking about PREVIOUS generations.....I think using Vietnam as an example is rather far back.



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

Britain don't always commit the troops. Your generalising horribly. Afghanistan, SAS went in because they're the best in the world. But so did Delta Force and the US marines....in MUCH greater numbers.
Iraq, its unlikely many british will go, our tanks' engines can't cope with the dust, the troops' boots melt, and our weapons are (alegedly) dodgy. Also Bush will want this victory for himself.



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

Rather far back? Tell this to the people who still suffer from naplam bombs in Vietnam or those in Japan who are sick due to the atom bombs. Did anyone say "We are sorry for Hiroshima?" I never heard about it. They have even put the plain that dropped the bomb in a museum to look at. But it is not only US of A. It is the whole western world that always uses double standards and still thinks in terms of "white=supreme race".

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

*plane, not plain. >Sorry

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS