notwell Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only a willfully idiot cannot see the connection between our (collectively) foreign policy in the Middle East and the instability in the region. It has been unstable for many hundreds and even thousands of years. They just didn't implicate the rest of the world with their terrorism and tyranny at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only a willfully idiot cannot see the connection between our (collectively) foreign policy in the Middle East and the instability in the region. It has been unstable for many hundreds and even thousands of years. They just didn't implicate the rest of the world with their terrorism and tyranny at the time. So the billions of pounds/dollars of Western munitions dropped on Iraq and Afghanistan, and the destabilising of several Middle Eastern governments had no effect what so ever on the immigration crisis? Like I said....wilful idiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Iraq was liberated and given a chance to become a better place for everyone to live in. So was it better under Saddam when no one could leave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Iraq was liberated and given a chance to become a better place for everyone to live in. So was it better under Saddam when no one could leave? Better is subjective. Did we make it better by continuing to bomb the snot out of it for the last 12 odd years? And what about Afghanistan? Did we make that better at great cost in lives and money? Would we of made Syria better by dropping bombs on it day in and day out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only a willfully idiot cannot see the connection between our (collectively) foreign policy in the Middle East and the instability in the region. In English please ! Learn to read. OK, what is a "wilfully idiot" or a "collectively foreign policy" then, clever twat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only a willfully idiot cannot see the connection between our (collectively) foreign policy in the Middle East and the instability in the region. In English please ! Learn to read. OK, what is a "wilfully idiot" or a "collectively foreign policy" then, clever twat? Wilfully should be wilful, and collectively should be collective... Mistakes when typing and yet so easy to interpret with just a little application of the brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only a willfully idiot cannot see the connection between our (collectively) foreign policy in the Middle East and the instability in the region. In English please ! Learn to read. OK, what is a "wilfully idiot" or a "collectively foreign policy" then, clever twat? Wilfully should be wilful, and collectively should be collective... Mistakes when typing and yet so easy to interpret with just a little application of the brain. No shit Sherlock ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 It is correct to say that the area we know as the 'Middle East' has been at war with itself, one way or another, for millenia. As soon as Muhammed moved to Medina the area erupted into country-wide chaos and murder. However, before Islam reared its ugly head, It was always a place of tribalists vying for supremacy and when they weren't fighting amongst themselves they were cruelly persecuting Jews, christians, Zoroastrians and other minor sects, subjugating them by forced conversion and the sword. It's much the same now in areas held by IS, except of course the sword has been replaced by the Ak47 (Russian) or its cheaper (Chinese) equivalent, which is where much of their arsenal originated. It is folly, and far too convenient to accuse the more recent intervention of Western military actions as the cause of this dilemma. Those people have been running from war, the miseries of various dictatorships and tribal expansionism since records began. War, famine and oppression is endemic in these societies. The mistake that the West made was its vain-glorious desire to bring some sort of path to peace ( and of course the price of oil ) by removing the likes of Saddam and Gaddafi which resulted in, as we see, further murderous de-stabilisation and the advent of the so-called, 'Arab Spring', the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, IS and Al-qaeda. Historically, the murder and mayhem has thrived in an atmosphere of deceit, corruption and the tribal-supremacism which existed for 2,000 years before the 'Religion of Peace' went on the rampage. Let's not forget these facts ... Saddam and Gaddafi....better the Dictator you know than the crazy ass mofos that will fill the void afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It is correct to say that the area we know as the 'Middle East' has been at war with itself, one way or another, for millenia. As soon as Muhammed moved to Medina the area erupted into country-wide chaos and murder. However, before Islam reared its ugly head, It was always a place of tribalists vying for supremacy and when they weren't fighting amongst themselves they were cruelly persecuting Jews, christians, Zoroastrians and other minor sects, subjugating them by forced conversion and the sword. It's much the same now in areas held by IS, except of course the sword has been replaced by the Ak47 (Russian) or its cheaper (Chinese) equivalent, which is where much of their arsenal originated. It is folly, and far too convenient to accuse the more recent intervention of Western military actions as the cause of this dilemma. Those people have been running from war, the miseries of various dictatorships and tribal expansionism since records began. War, famine and oppression is endemic in these societies. The mistake that the West made was its vain-glorious desire to bring some sort of path to peace ( and of course the price of oil ) by removing the likes of Saddam and Gaddafi which resulted in, as we see, further murderous de-stabilisation and the advent of the so-called, 'Arab Spring', the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, IS and Al-qaeda. Historically, the murder and mayhem has thrived in an atmosphere of deceit, corruption and the tribal-supremacism which existed for 2,000 years before the 'Religion of Peace' went on the rampage. Let's not forget these facts ... Wow. No wonder people want to get out. Sounds like a terrible place to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It is correct to say that the area we know as the 'Middle East' has been at war with itself, one way or another, for millenia. As soon as Muhammed moved to Medina the area erupted into country-wide chaos and murder. However, before Islam reared its ugly head, It was always a place of tribalists vying for supremacy and when they weren't fighting amongst themselves they were cruelly persecuting Jews, christians, Zoroastrians and other minor sects, subjugating them by forced conversion and the sword. It's much the same now in areas held by IS, except of course the sword has been replaced by the Ak47 (Russian) or its cheaper (Chinese) equivalent, which is where much of their arsenal originated. It is folly, and far too convenient to accuse the more recent intervention of Western military actions as the cause of this dilemma. Those people have been running from war, the miseries of various dictatorships and tribal expansionism since records began. War, famine and oppression is endemic in these societies. The mistake that the West made was its vain-glorious desire to bring some sort of path to peace ( and of course the price of oil ) by removing the likes of Saddam and Gaddafi which resulted in, as we see, further murderous de-stabilisation and the advent of the so-called, 'Arab Spring', the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, IS and Al-qaeda. Historically, the murder and mayhem has thrived in an atmosphere of deceit, corruption and the tribal-supremacism which existed for 2,000 years before the 'Religion of Peace' went on the rampage. Let's not forget these facts ... Saddam and Gaddafi....better the Dictator you know than the crazy ass mofos that will fill the void afterwards It is my fear that the EU and UK are about to facilitate some of these ''crazy ass mofos'' through the emotional reaction to the current crisis. Whenever I've seen these well-meaning europeans queuing-up to greet those refugees with a warm, supportive welcome I am reluctant to share their optimism because their collective naivety may well be their cultural downfall. Or at least, a future-shock of ghetto's and enclaves of peoples who end up hating the culture that gave them succour and trying to change it, either by demographic number or violence and intimidation. There is an essence of this happening around the UK, already. Yes. No matter what happens, our culture must not change. It has taken thousands of years for our culture to develop into what it is today. We are a proud mix of Celtic/pictish/Roman/Viking/Saxon/ Norman/ German heritage. No way do I want any other foreigners coming in. My culture of German beer and a curry on a Friday night must be preserved. We can't have other people come here with different cultures. I demand to be left in peace to eat my Macdonalds burger. The last thing I want to see is a Syrian Restaurant in my town. I don't want to see people in the street who threaten my rich culture. Then again. Why not? Culture is a strange beast. It changes. I was thinking about this recently. My wife is Chinese, and our Child has a Chinese passport. They are in the Uk at the moment on holiday. What culture should our daughter have? Should I be an upright defender on my culture, and ensure our daughter has a strong Scottish culture. Or should I insist she is 100% Chinese? In the end of course, it's nothing to do with me. It's her choice. Of course, the culture issue I have is my own doing. I went off to live in another country and I married a foreign woman. My choice. So I can understand the thinking of people who stay at home. They want their culture to be static. It must not be allowed to change. I respect that. The cultural bubble must be intact and defended. I don't actually agree with it. I think culture has to change and evolve. Of course it will have to change. There are too many people in the world now for culture bubbles to stay intact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagman Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It is correct to say that the area we know as the 'Middle East' has been at war with itself, one way or another, for millenia. As soon as Muhammed moved to Medina the area erupted into country-wide chaos and murder. However, before Islam reared its ugly head, It was always a place of tribalists vying for supremacy and when they weren't fighting amongst themselves they were cruelly persecuting Jews, christians, Zoroastrians and other minor sects, subjugating them by forced conversion and the sword. It's much the same now in areas held by IS, except of course the sword has been replaced by the Ak47 (Russian) or its cheaper (Chinese) equivalent, which is where much of their arsenal originated. It is folly, and far too convenient to accuse the more recent intervention of Western military actions as the cause of this dilemma. Those people have been running from war, the miseries of various dictatorships and tribal expansionism since records began. War, famine and oppression is endemic in these societies. The mistake that the West made was its vain-glorious desire to bring some sort of path to peace ( and of course the price of oil ) by removing the likes of Saddam and Gaddafi which resulted in, as we see, further murderous de-stabilisation and the advent of the so-called, 'Arab Spring', the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, IS and Al-qaeda. Historically, the murder and mayhem has thrived in an atmosphere of deceit, corruption and the tribal-supremacism which existed for 2,000 years before the 'Religion of Peace' went on the rampage. Let's not forget these facts ... Saddam and Gaddafi....better the Dictator you know than the crazy ass mofos that will fill the void afterwards It is my fear that the EU and UK are about to facilitate some of these ''crazy ass mofos'' through the emotional reaction to the current crisis. Whenever I've seen these well-meaning europeans queuing-up to greet those refugees with a warm, supportive welcome I am reluctant to share their optimism because their collective naivety may well be their cultural downfall. Or at least, a future-shock of ghetto's and enclaves of peoples who end up hating the culture that gave them succour and trying to change it, either by demographic number or violence and intimidation. There is an essence of this happening around the UK, already. Haven't Isis been saying for months they were going to get thousands intermingled with the migrants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagman Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It is correct to say that the area we know as the 'Middle East' has been at war with itself, one way or another, for millenia. As soon as Muhammed moved to Medina the area erupted into country-wide chaos and murder. However, before Islam reared its ugly head, It was always a place of tribalists vying for supremacy and when they weren't fighting amongst themselves they were cruelly persecuting Jews, christians, Zoroastrians and other minor sects, subjugating them by forced conversion and the sword. It's much the same now in areas held by IS, except of course the sword has been replaced by the Ak47 (Russian) or its cheaper (Chinese) equivalent, which is where much of their arsenal originated. It is folly, and far too convenient to accuse the more recent intervention of Western military actions as the cause of this dilemma. Those people have been running from war, the miseries of various dictatorships and tribal expansionism since records began. War, famine and oppression is endemic in these societies. The mistake that the West made was its vain-glorious desire to bring some sort of path to peace ( and of course the price of oil ) by removing the likes of Saddam and Gaddafi which resulted in, as we see, further murderous de-stabilisation and the advent of the so-called, 'Arab Spring', the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, IS and Al-qaeda. Historically, the murder and mayhem has thrived in an atmosphere of deceit, corruption and the tribal-supremacism which existed for 2,000 years before the 'Religion of Peace' went on the rampage. Let's not forget these facts ... Saddam and Gaddafi....better the Dictator you know than the crazy ass mofos that will fill the void afterwards It is my fear that the EU and UK are about to facilitate some of these ''crazy ass mofos'' through the emotional reaction to the current crisis. Whenever I've seen these well-meaning europeans queuing-up to greet those refugees with a warm, supportive welcome I am reluctant to share their optimism because their collective naivety may well be their cultural downfall. Or at least, a future-shock of ghetto's and enclaves of peoples who end up hating the culture that gave them succour and trying to change it, either by demographic number or violence and intimidation. There is an essence of this happening around the UK, already. Yes. No matter what happens, our culture must not change. It has taken thousands of years for our culture to develop into what it is today. We are a proud mix of Celtic/pictish/Roman/Viking/Saxon/ Norman/ German heritage. No way do I want any other foreigners coming in. My culture of German beer and a curry on a Friday night must be preserved. We can't have other people come here with different cultures. I demand to be left in peace to eat my Macdonalds burger. The last thing I want to see is a Syrian Restaurant in my town. I don't want to see people in the street who threaten my rich culture. Then again. Why not? Culture is a strange beast. It changes. I was thinking about this recently. My wife is Chinese, and our Child has a Chinese passport. They are in the Uk at the moment on holiday. What culture should our daughter have? Should I be an upright defender on my culture, and ensure our daughter has a strong Scottish culture. Or should I insist she is 100% Chinese? In the end of course, it's nothing to do with me. It's her choice. Of course, the culture issue I have is my own doing. I went off to live in another country and I married a foreign woman. My choice. So I can understand the thinking of people who stay at home. They want their culture to be static. It must not be allowed to change. I respect that. The cultural bubble must be intact and defended. I don't actually agree with it. I think culture has to change and evolve. Of course it will have to change. There are too many people in the world now for culture bubbles to stay intact. Whole lotta culture coming our way - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVCG7HHsyBo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think we have enough "culture" of our own already... <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/35ozD9F46-8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagman Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think we have enough "culture" of our own already... <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/35ozD9F46-8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Do we want more? Should be interesting when they meet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrie Stevens Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Wonder if they will bring their wars with them? I mean not just Jihadis or whatever who are against us but Syrians have been a fierce enemy of Israel and have proved tough to fight on the Golan Heights although Israel has destroyed dozens of their fighter aircraft. Britain is the country responsible under the Balfour Declaration for the Jews having a homeland now Israel. Manchester is just one city with a large Jewish population. I can recall Iranians demonstrating in Piccadilly, Manchester buring Israeli flags, a chanting "Death to the Jews" (Something we would never have been allowed to say about them or anyone else) I lived for a while in Lower Broughton, Salford and the Jewish area is the next one up Higher Broughton. In 1987 at Salford Tech I had a 1,000 free sheet paper round of the Salford City Reporter and some of the Jewish people (It is street after street of Jews by the way many thousands) told me that like the IRA and the Ulster Loyalists they had been hiding arms for decades as supplied by Israel. Now there is a huge Irish population also in Manchester but that did not stop the Provisional IRA from demolishing the City centre. So surely, MI5 and 6 must know that amongst these refugees there will inevitably be infiltrated a sleeping force of terrorists and who knows which group they will attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.