Bllody hell!!!

[chunkielad]

Looks like war in a week then!!!

[craigT19]

nevermind.....fuck all i ca do about it no matter how much im against it
____________________
Bikes owned :- 2001 nsr125, 1999 zx6r, 2006 yzf-r1, 2009 xmax 250, 2012 yzf-r1, 2015 MT-07
Current bike : - 2016 MT-10
BCF member pops. sadly missed 1945-2003

[JimboJ]

its a good thing for mr blair cos he'll no longer be in power by the next elections!
____________________
[00:42] <NSR-Andy> which one's the missionary position
[00:42] <NSR-Andy> i've heard it's good
[9:42pm] <Shaun> you came first mike | <Shaun> yes gav, because I really want to fuck you

[Hex]

out of interest who is for this war?! there seems to be alot of people not for it etc....

Personally I'm for it, and I understand the reasons why people dont want it (which mainly seem to be political)

But when the kurds etc want the war, as they want sadam removed, you have to wonder if its worth it to get rid of sadam!?

But Blair is a .... well lets put it this way he should never of came to power anyway! and before anyone asks I didnt vote for him
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[G]

meh, just wrote loads of stuff and lost it when a link opened in this page ..grrrrrrr

anyway.... look here, if you can be bothered to read it, for a detailed view of the situation and why it arose (from one perspecticve anyway).

[Hex]

Its strange how most stories etc focus on how america want the oil blah blah..... but its very rarely reported that the war would be averted if Sadam and his government step down!

if they went into exile (spelling) the war would not go ahead! this fact is very rarely reported.

you have to remeber the papers love to have a go at polotions etc and basically they are having a field day with this whole situation, they not only get to call Bush a blood hungry bloke but they get to call blair his little lap dog!

just skimmed that story but it goes on about how america wants to basically run the world etc by putting millitery every where etc..... this slightly diverts attention from the actual point of what the war is about... getting rid of sadam..... also sadams reign of terror (and i do mean that word) started bak in the 80s with culling of kurds, napalm attacks, chemical attacks, beatings, rapes, public executions etc all this before the UN got involved
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[Hex]

you also got to remeber that oil products such as petrol will start to become less and all oil will be used for will be lubrication as fuels such as water and gas become more exploited

And this will happen in the near future - it has to! people like ford sat on the water (hydrogen) engine years ago, simply because it would have ment a slump in the oil business etc! which of course wasn't allowed to happen because of the governemnt and the economy. But now we know that oil reserves/fileds aint gona last that much longer this technology will have to be used!
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[G]

Sorry... did write a load of stuff saying I disagree with the war due to the way it's being instigated, but have though we do need to get rid of saddam for a long time... but we're going about the wrong way etc etc,.... canna' be bothered to write it again cos I got stuff to do
Same situation in Afghanistan, previous to the the twin towers incident I did think that the Taliban needed to be got rid off, but running into a country saying 'we don't have any proof, but we don't like you anyway' isn't a reasonable justification. If these countries were allowed to represent themselves in an American court I suspect they would have a field day.

Also there's the whole 'May the person who si without sin cast the first stone' bit.... America holds massive stockpiles of 'Weapons of mass destruction', has recently 'illegally' invaded another country, is keeping prisonors in illegal conditions against various conventions/treaties, has a populace that has been known to support terroism with serious financial aid (IRA etc).

How much good /did/ we do in Afghanistan? Was the number of deaths justifiable? I'm not just talking about the red cross centre's that got bombed or wedding that got strafed, but the many thousands that died of starvation because they ddin't feel safe where they were and had to become refugees.


Anway, really better get back to doing bike stuff

[Kickstart]

Hi

I am not in favour of this war. It seems just to be an excuse to hide the fact that they have had no success in finding Bin Laden.

Sure Saddam is a nasty piece of work, as are a large number of world leaders. Does that justify the half a million Iraqi civilians that are expected to be killed in this war?

Anyway, without a UN resolution then Bush (with us probably) as the agressors, and as such are little better than Saddam (who invalded Kuwait).

Best case scenario Iraq will not have Saddam in power, but Al Queda will have plenty more volunteers

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing

[Danny]

[G]

TBH I really don't think would use any 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' against the west, so it's not really an issue in teh US books... however they don't like Saddam on many levels (though the injustice in his country seems very little to do with it.)

However you can't just get rid of a leader of a foreign nation because you don't like the way they rule/are in power etc.... I don't think it would work if went along and said... well more of the population voted for someone else, so your democracy isn't working... get out bush.

[Dannyj]

well for wot its worth i am for the war in iraq... the US and UK governments have so much intelligence and they know more then we ever would, and if they think the world is in danger from saddam than i think we should listen, and as for the civilians that would get killed if we went in, saddam kills and has killed far more of his own people that would ever be killed in an allied invasion...

I personaly dont want to sit around and wait till saddam (or somebody he supplies) does something with a chemical or biological weapon and say 'gosh we should have done something about him'....

War isnt an easy thing and i am not saying ppl who are against it are wrong... i think it is a decision best left to world leaders, they have all the information, and we have to trust them!....... and if they get it wrong then they should have to answer for it!!

Well anyway ... lets all hope that something happens so we dont have to go to war anyway!!! lets hope saddam just runs of under some rock somewhere!!!!

[G]

[Kris]

Only reason the US are so sure Saddam have weapons of mass destruction is because they've still got the delivery note receipt. The US have been selling arms for years (even to the IRA for chrissakes) so it's not really suprising it was all gonna end in tears

I'm all for the war on Saddam, but bleugh I'm confused.
____________________
NSR125RR - ZXR750H1 - ZX9R E1 - GSF600S - GSF600SK3 - VFR400-NC30 - SV1000N - ST1100-R - CBR900RR-R - GSF1200SK5 - GSF600SK1 - VFR1200FA - GSXR1000K2 - ZZR1400 D8F
www.prisonplanet.com

[kevo]

My main concearn is for the poor soilders who will engage the Iraq troops. I would not be surprised if Saddam nukes both his troops and the invading American and British soilders.

The oil fields will also go , he'll blow them up rather than let anyone else get control of them.

Regards,
Kevin.

[G]

I am more concerned for the Iraqi troops.

Not only are many of them not there by choice, but they have a lot less protection if chemical/biological weapons are used.

A lot of Iraqi troops died in the first gulf war when U Stroops bulldozed over their bunkers...not very nice, especially when some of them were trying to surender (The US didn't really have any plans for what to do with prisoners etc)

[JimboJ]

i think we should let mr bush go and do his thing and get wasted, itll be a huge embarrassment for him...as for our troops id be relluctant to send them on a death wish. War is good in that the iraqi people if they survive will no longer have that wanker in charge. thats what people cant understand over here(i know an iraqi who is came over here cos one ofhis family members didnt vote for saddam) i think the war should be against saddam and not iraq(which i know is hard but hey)
____________________
[00:42] <NSR-Andy> which one's the missionary position
[00:42] <NSR-Andy> i've heard it's good
[9:42pm] <Shaun> you came first mike | <Shaun> yes gav, because I really want to fuck you

[Hex]

the war is against saddam and not iraq... granted he has his military which are iraqies but in the end the war is with him not the inocents and the iraqi people

I reckon our casualties will be minimum (in logistical terms) and of course theirs will be high

unfortunatly our service guys are there laying down their lifes for their government (same as the iraqies) but the fact is thats what the services do - a harsh point of view I know, and trust me I work with these guys dayly, I have friends and family who serve and as we speek are out there - the reality of war is we will take casualties and any death is not plesent but they are expected.

after seeing the sights from the previous invasion I know it aint pretty, infact some of the pictures/reports and talks (unoffical and official restricted documents - not just the papers and tv news - i mean imagry from the planes and from the guys who served out there) I have had are sickening but I'm still for it.
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[G]

[Hex]

I agree that the term "war" should be used lightly in these situations!

and if they sent in ground troops inocent casualties would be less but our caualties would be higher... this makes the situation a unwinabl situation

but thats the joys of war
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[Couger]

Lots of reasons to be against,
Lots of reasons to be for,

For me I'm tipped towards the for argument, I like Hex's thinking on this one.

Sorry to be brief but I'm about to go out!

Cougs
____________________
Fly Navy

[Kickstart]

[Hex]

[quote="Kickstart]No evidence that he really used them.[/quote]

not on us but definate record of him using them on the kurds etc - cant remeber the names of the towns etc.... effects of the gasses will be evident for the next 80 years with the women not been able to give birth naturally and deformaties
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[G]

I don't think the merkans have a particular issue with him killing his own people... the reason they are giving for attacking is that he is a danger to american citezens.
Which I believe, as Keith said is more likley to be true if we do attack, the reason that most countries hold these weapons is to /deter/ others from attacking, because the attackers know that they may suffer significant casualties if they are succesful.

So far alot more of 'our' side have been damaged by the the chemicals /we/ gave them to counteract the possible effects of Iraqi chemical weapons than have by actual chemical weapons.


A quote from the link I posted up ^there^, okay, it's from the Iran-Iraq war time, but still fairly relevent to the merkans way of thinking, I think:

[Beechy]

I reckon there's a few points to be made on this one.

i) American's wanting Saddam to get rid of hie WMD, which is the only country to ever use WMD (I draw your mind back to Nagasaki, Hiroshima etc...)

ii) Why would Saddam attack the west? Talk about biting the hand that feeds him - if he attacked the west wouldn't buy his oil.

iii) Where's the evidence 9/11 was committed by OBL and his cave bound buddies. You should have a read at https://www.whatreallyhappened.com/NEWSTF/STRANGER_THAN_FICTION.html for an enlightening theory on the matter.

iv) War on terror? OK then how about Northern Island, or even Israel. How many UN resolution has Sharon broken? Shit loads more than anyone else, the only reason they get away with it (take the piss so much) is because America donates billions of dollars a year in foreign aid.

Basically what I'm saying is that this situation is by no means black and white. America has its own f*ucked up world domination agenda and sadly we're getting dragged into it.

Next time you're out and about, or even watching TV take a step back and have a look at how our society has become infested with American thoughts, ideas, principles and not to mention products.

Right, rant over now
____________________
Just face it, some days you're the pigeon and others the statue...
https://www.chrisbeech.com