If they all think like this!!!

[prime1]

Originally posted by FatBusinessman


However, they have used these little beauties against Palestinian civilians...

Apologies for Embattle-style BBC link postage...

Wasnt intended to be used against civillians, its a terrible and unfortuante mistake, but it was the unintetional death of 4 innocents, whilst attempting to get a group of terrorists. The weapons are not illegal (and please explain why they are worse than shells that explode?) and they are not designed to kill thousands of people at once. Comparing that to the Iraqs chemical warfare attacks on Kurdish civillians is a little unfair.

 

[FatBusinessman]

I don't think Shocko's point is that he wants 3000 civilians to die. I think his point is that the US needs a good kick up the arse to get it to see sense, and if that involved 3000 civilians dying then that's a regrettable necessity.

However, the flaw in this argument is that it has already been shown that kicking the US up the arse doesn't make it see sense, it just makes it even more arrogant and belligerent.

 

[Will]

The points that are being made is, at the end of the day, life isn't black and white, there are two sides to all arguments. There is enough grey area going on here that the US sending troops in is unjustified, and sends a very dangerous signal to the world.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by prime1
The weapons are not illegal (and please explain why they are worse than shells that explode?)

Airburst fletchette weaponry is banned under international agreements, they are pretty devastating weapons that cause unimaginable injuries and suffering.

Flechettes are in fact even worse than air-fuel explosives, which burn you alive for a few seconds, or pop your brain out your ears with sudden decompression, but flechette literally strips the skin from you and impales your internal organs on thousands of tiny needles, you die slowly and in agony.

I'm not sure if flechette is allowed as standard calibre small arms, basically it can penetrate kevlar and other forms of protective clothing, but certainly undirected airburst flechettes are a no-no.

 

[prime1]

yes but according to that article the types of fletchette shells they were using were legal.

And weapons are deisgned to kill, no weapon is "nice", an explosion kill sby either kinetically tearing someone apart, burning them to death or fragments from the explosion kill them. Most explosive shells actually rely on the shell fragmenting so that shards of hot metal are sent out at high speed, this is just a more severe form of that premise. Its the same difference between a shotgun and a rifle really.

 

[Chalky's_Wife]

Well I've read through- read scanned quickly- most of the above, and I never cease to be amazed at how much you lot can find to write about, and coherently- I just wish I could access the forums at work but work in very small office- gonna get caught!

How convenient for Bush that this Saddam milarky has overshadowed the world summit regarding global warming et. al. America, though the world's worst offender, refuses to adhere to or take with any degree of seriousness, any of the guidlines that many other countries are implementing to cut down on the industrial activities that are increasingly speeding the worlds meltdown.
I think it would serve humanity right if nature were to finally suceed in producing a lethal virus causing global culling. All the evidence shows that eventually, one way or another, or through a combination of, plague, rising sea levels and adverse weather conditions the human race most certainly will not exist in it's current form or number in the future.
That is unless the important issues are addressed soon-
many nucleur power stations will become dangerously old within most of our lifetimes- surely the sites, ugly enough now, should be de-comissioned now and replaced with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy before they decay beyond redemption and Chernobyl is repeated around the world.
There are ways of modifying existing industrial plant to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions- however bonuses and dividends would have to be reduced for a couple of years to raise the finances and we can't have poor execs suffering!
Global recycling should be an everyday thing- not just where the local councils have the funding to implement such schemes.
I could go on but I'm sure that 1. you all get the gist of what I'm saying. 2. someone is bound to disagree and I wish to conserve my ammo. 3. I've just finished work and I'm badly in need of coffee and a biscuit.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Chalky's_Wife
I think it would serve humanity right if nature were to finally suceed in producing a lethal virus causing global culling.

I've a great idea, in the meantime lets oppose the "toxic" shipments of GM food to starving Africans by putting pressure on their governments, that way a whole bunch of humans wont grow up and pollute the world.

P.S. This is the same "toxic" food that the US and Europe have been eating for around eight years now, with no ill effects.

Green politics for ya

 

[Stazbumpa]

Been reading this with interest.

1: The French are by and large wankers. They have been because the last time they brought us to heel was in 1066 and that was by the Normans, who were'nt exactly mainstream French in the first place (Normans comes from Norsemen).
Anyway, we have consistantly stuck our fingers up at France ever since and so they hate us for it.

2: Sort your life out Shocko. Learn about the world. Without Western dominace, we would'nt have any of what we have now. And before anyone goes on about life being shit, try living in Afghanistan for more than 30 seconds.
Saying that America needs another 9/11 marks you out as a streak of piss indeed. I take it you want to embrace Sharia law and make women wear massive fuck off Burqha's too.
REMEMBER CUNT: The only reason you can spout off your bollocks is because of freedom of speech, which was won by men and women far braver and indeed usefull than you will ever be.

3: The USA is indeed taking the piss with the Climate Summit, but then they hold all the cards. One of the worlds biggest industrial nations cannot be easily told what to do. I would dearly love for them to sort out their pollution, and I beleive it can be done, but not yet.

4: Somalia was a cock up, but the UN bears some of the responsibility. The trouble with the UN is that they sit and debate everything in great detail, and as a result any potential threat has got worse, any genocide has finished and basically nothing ever gets done. The UN is ineffective and far too cumbersome to be an international enforcer.
In Somalia the USA acted on its own and I honestly believe it was the right thing to do. The fact that they did this because of UN incompetence has been forgotten.


There, that'll do for now. Did I mention that Shocko is a twat? I did? Oh good.



PS: My first post on a broadband connection But its at a mates house

 

[S-Gray]

There was a guy in my Classes last year who fought in Vietnam (He was Vietnamees (sp)) He was a very interesting Bloke, i believe he was Captured but he escaped a few times, and found his way onto a Boat heading to England with Immigrants aboard.

He was a Martial Artist.. fuck me he was strong and smart about moves

 

[Shocko]

Originally posted by Stazbumpa
REMEMBER CUNT: The only reason you can spout off your bollocks is because of freedom of speech, which was won by men and women far braver and indeed usefull than you will ever be.

What, so speaking out against the US makes me useless and a coward? Not being racist against arabs makes me a cunt? It's not "western society" i have a problem with. It's Americans moving their fat arses around the world like they own it.

You talk about fighting for freedom, well think about this. Men and Women fought for our freedom, yet you're willing to throw it away by mindlessly following America - There will be more terrorist attacks if the US attacks Iraq, and i have no desire to end up on the receiving end of them, for the sake of US imperialism.

 

[Chalky's_Wife]

I don't know much about the GM food exports let alone toxic ones.
The type of Global viral event I was referring to was nature driven not man-made.
I do not think that the African governments are the sole contributors to global starvation- in fact out of all humanity they will probably be the ones to survive- they are not reliant on electricity, supermarkets, technology etc. so the loss of such 'necessities' will not affect their existence as much as the 'developed' world. Could you survive, and I'm not talking SAS style in some far flung place, should the world go pear shaped? Would you know which plants would feed, heal or kill you?

And I suppose I only know generalities and therefore cannot put a reasonable argument, which is why I try to remain vague and uncontroversial-ish.

My politics- I don't subscribe to any particular party
My religion- believe in existing happily as long as the way to happiness is not achieved to the detriment of others
My view- bring back common sense and simple living, slow the pace of life back down a step or two I'm tired of being called a stresshead by my daughters cos I'm working too hard just to keep on top of my workload

That's it for now again.....time for a smoke......

 

[prime1]

Originally posted by Shocko

What, so speaking out against the US makes me useless and a coward? Not being racist against arabs makes me a cunt? It's not "western society" i have a problem with. It's Americans moving their fat arses around the world like they own it.

You talk about fighting for freedom, well think about this. Men and Women fought for our freedom, yet you're willing to throw it away by mindlessly following America - There will be more terrorist attacks if the US attacks Iraq, and i have no desire to end up on the receiving end of them, for the sake of US imperialism.

Uve totally missed his point, you are hating and attacking the main country that has protected our freedoms over the past century - without which it is extremely unlikely we would still have them, freedom is in the eye of the beholder, hardly anyone actually wants full freedom - because the only full freedom is anarchy.

Given the choice I would rather live under the US's pollitical and governement system that Iraqs - u seem to prefer Iraqs. But since their system is essentially the same as ours that wont make a lot of difference. Their system clearly works (how else did they - and we - get so powerful>?) and if it aint broke, dont fix it.

I disagree with their position on global warming, they are doing some things to try and deal with it, but it isnt enough. And Britain has condemned them for it.

The GM foods issue is that African countries have been rejecting aid food shipments from the US because they are GM (theres probably some conspiracy there as well about the Evil US (tm) sending gm food to mutate all africans in to americans as well, worth looking up on it Shocko), even though their people are starving.

Its actually the Africans that would go first due to environmental problems as they ahve no way of stockpiling food, not enough electricity to provide light following a fallout etc

Still this will please Shocko as well, the most likely "next" global catastrophe is that half of one of the Canary Islands will simply "break" and slide into the atlantic, the resulting todal wave is predicted to decimate the US east coast.

A lot of this global warming stuff is over blown and theres a lot of conjecture and ifs and maybes involved. Polution is without a doubt a problem, but climate naturally changes, the UK used to be under hundreds of feet ice and snow for example. We are coming out of an ice age, and temperatures would be rising anyway, however pollution appears to be accelerating the process. There are obvious things that need to be done, that arent.

I dont think getting rid of nuclear reactors in 1st world countries is the answer, as they are they only reliable form of "clean" energy. There was a plan to build a massive tidal generator farm in the channel, I dont know how far that has gotten though. Wind/Solar Power simply isnt reliable enough in many countries.

There are also the more sci-fi "nearly possible but not quite " solutions, solar farms in space that "beam" the energy to collectors on the planet (microwave energy plants) etc

Things will improve as technology progresses, but they should be improved faster, on that much I agree.

 

[Shocko]

Originally posted by prime1
You've totally missed his point, you are hating and attacking the main country that has protected our freedoms over the past.

You're kidding me? Who protected the freedom of the west during the 2 world wars? The UK! What other threats to our freedom have their been? The communists? The cold war kept them at bay, with actions such as Vietnam and Korea simply being about US single mindness.

Given the choice I would rather live under the US's pollitical and governement system that Iraqs - u seem to prefer Iraqs. But since their system is essentially the same as ours that wont make a lot of difference. Their system clearly works (how else did they - and we - get so powerful>?) and if it aint broke, dont fix it.

Our system is totally differant to the American way. Most European countrys have socialist infrastructures, which were setup after the 2nd WW, and have worked marvelously, to reinstate the power of a continent devistated by war. Considering that the US itself completely avoided any war on its home ground, i would have been astounded if the US hadn't risen to power like it has.

America is based on the idea that big business is key, wheras we place our bets on the government. And looking at the recent failure of railtrack, i think trying to switch to a fully capitalist system now would ruin this country further.

 

[FatBusinessman]

The problem with the Americans throwing the word "freedom" around all the time is this:

America, originally, was founded on the principles of freedom for all and Constitutions and such admirable principles. But now, the US operates on the principle of money. Face it, you're no longer the bastion of liberty and all that is good with the world - you're just plain greedy.

 

[prime1]

"You're kidding me? Who protected the freedom of the west during the 2 world wars? The UK! What other threats to our freedom have their been? The communists? The cold war kept them at bay, with actions such as Vietnam and Korea simply being about US single mindness."

*sigh* and who was the cold war between? the US and Russia, europe was far too done in to fihgt russia on its own.

Actually european governments are a complete mix, there are socialist states in there that is true, but socialist is not the majority system - although Il forgive you for thinking it was cause France has done such a good job of hi-jacking the system.

The UK has a very capitalist society, similar to the US's -- which major economy is faring best in Europe? The UK, fastest growth and most stability. 3 of the g4 nations have an almost entirely capitalist society UK, Japan and US, Germany being the exception. They are all however business oreintated deomcracies, regardless of the technicalities, everything, for all countries is about money and prosperity. Free market democracy is the most

There are no real communist states anymore either, China is more of a right wing dictatorship than a communist state now, although it still pretends to be communist.