Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Technically speaking Dave is talking simplistic bo**ocks.
To commit a crime in the UK you have to break its laws. Even Mr Hitler did not break any UK laws.
Saddam’s crimes were against the Iraqi people and the Iraqi legal system, as imperfect as it is, put him on trail and sentenced him.
You could ask the same question about the Death penalty in the US or any other country.
All Blair said was that this government does not condone the death penalty.<br>
Interesting subject why and how people gamble and really does gambling for the sake of gambling eventually take over? Interesting to ask yourself if really are you in horseracing primarly for gambling or for horseracing?
Many people on here put in lots of hard work and have the discipline to follow staking plans and record all their bets. Good luck to them. Many others just do not want to work so hard.
I tend to think as long as you are gambling what you can afford to loose then what is the problem. When I was much younger I had my bank and staking plans but always found it hard to hold the discipline when you really fancied something or had only one point on the big shot that flew in. Nowadays I find it much more fun.
I tend to have a level stake I feel comfortable spending. Occasionally I will double or treble that if I am feeling confident. I seldom back e/w.
Jim,
That Shakira spoof was the funniest thing I have seen for ages. That was you doing the Shakira part wasn’t it? :laugh:
I think the UK politics is now skewed too much to the US presidential style where people take their views purely on the party leaders using soundbites and press hype. Little attention paid to what either party stands for as they fall over themselves to out spin each other. The press makes the agenda nowadays turning politics into a soap opera and it really does not matter who is right if they are out gunning for you.
I can see where Grasshopper is coming from as Cameron tries to out spin Tony Blair and steal back the middle ground he stole from them. On issues such as Iraq where Blair gets all the flak the Torries would have done little different. On issues such as sleaze I think they are always worse.
As someone who grew up in a mining village through the troubles I for one cannot bring myself to vote Tory. If you look past Cameron it is just the same people.
The Liberals can afford the luxury of being liberal because they have no chance of winning. Same goes for the other parties in permanent opposition who can promise the earth or soundbite on a few issues. A vote for them is wasted.
That leaves Labour for me as a party or a good local candidate as Insomniac suggests. If Brown or Reid take over soon then who knows how the press machine will play it out.
Welcome Ruth,<br>You should fit in well here with quite a few like minded souls. <br>Roll on the NH season and sentiment. <br>Dammed be statistics and trends.
Dohhhhh!
Had a bet on Fantasy Believer drawn 9. Knew about the draw bias but do not put in the work these days. Just playing really.
With respect Aranalde I am suggesting that the young people of Lebanon and Palestine are having their cause hijacked by outside parties who are funding an armed struggle rather than a political solution. The last thing Iran, Syria or Hezbollah want is Lebanon to continue on the road it was taking where its people had just kicked out Syria and tried to stand on their own. The outside funding and supply of arms ensures that a political solution or dialogue is not something that Hezbollah are interested in. Hezbollah are just an armed militia with no interest in a peaceful Lebanon.
Talk about double standards. Did anyone say that it was OK for the US to fund terrorism anywhere? How does that justify Iran funding Hezbollah?
It does not matter if you perceive yourself as a freedom fighter or with just cause. If you randomly target innocent civilians through mass executions, random bombings, suicide bombings and indiscriminate rocket attacks then you are a terrorist in my book. I do not understand how any sane being will consider that unreasonable.
Yes, I think we are going around in circles here.
I suppose all the terrorists with their parochial causes got together and had a whip round. Maybe they ran some quiz nights or something. That will pay for a few explosives.
Terrorism costs money and all I am saying is someone is paying for it. That is the communality between them. It may not be the same person or same Islamic group but it crosses international borders. The conspiracy is international not one international conspiracy.
So drug cartels fund South American terrorist groups and Taliban do very nicely out of Afghanistan’s drug trade thank you very much. Iran pays for Hezbollah rockets. Al Qaeda looks to fund any group that will attack the west i.e. the attack on Spain because they had troops in Iraq. Spain capitulated to the terrorists and gave them a victory which encouraged them.
In Iraq British soldiers had $20,000 bounties on their heads. Very tempting if you have an AK47 and no money or prospects.<br>
Aranalde,
The fact that we can agree to disagree and while respecting each others point of view can rationally discuss these issues is a luxury we all take for granted. I firmly believe that there are people who are so irrationally entrenched in their views that they would not believe Bush or Blair on anything. Even to the extent of justifying and apologising for terrorist atrocities. As I have said before I do not think that any other British PM would have acted any differently that Blair did.
I believe Bush & Blair are right that there is an international conspiracy to fund terrorism worldwide. Al Quaeda constantly make videos commenting on Chechen and all sort of other ongoing conflicts. There is evidence to suggest that the Spanish bombing were Al Queda co-ordinated and financed. The Columbian organisations are a front for Drug cartels while the Taliban are similar in Afghanistan.
Terrorism is an expensive business. Hezbollah have been well armed and supplied by Iran/Syria. Iran & Al Queda are spending millions on the Iraqi insurgency. I think it all boils down to money and some thugs are becoming very rich cynically feeding of monies stimulating all sorts of terrorist causes.
The problem with middle eastern democracies is that they do not have a democratic choice of parties with anything other than one issue anti-western or religious policies. You do not have an educated voting population. They are not voting for tax issues, education or anything that we look for in a manifesto.
The average Arab’s loyalties tend to be Islamic first, tribal second and way down the list is national identity. The people in power use the Anti-western policies to focus away from the massive internal problems and blame all on the west. A tactic well used over the years to take attention away from internal corruption and incompetence.
Israel attacked the Lebanese infrastructure as part of a broad strategy to isolate Hezbollah and punish Lebanon for harbouring and nurturing this group. Hezbollah exists only to destroy Israel and indiscriminately attacked its civilians. Six years previously the Israelis left Lebanon under a UN Resolution where Hezbollah was supposed to be disarmed. Instead they were re armed and strengthened. If you are a community supporting terrorism then you reap what you sow. Hezbollah attacked Israel and had been terrorising Israelis for the previous six years with suicide bombers and rocket attacks.
In the long term I hope that the Israeli policy bears fruit in that the Lebanese realise that if they harbour Hezbollah then they will be constantly at war with Israel every few years. If they choose to live peacefully then Israel will leave them alone. I agree that Israel needs and wants a civilised Lebanon. I disagree that appeasing Hezbollah is the way to do this.<br>
The reason IRA support "dwindled" is because the bottom fell out of the Irish terrorist market. After years of sponsoring Irish nationalism the US gravy train dried up when the US public realised just where their money went. Irish terrorism both nationalist & unionist was front for crime and some people making a lot of money. They turned to dialogue when the found the bullet was not working.
Indeed I believe money is what the majority of terrorism is about. At the end of the Iraq war there was statistically little anti-coalition action from Iraqis, indeed there was much internal support. The majority of incidents were crime related. Then the money came pouring in with insurgents from Iran etc whose interest were not in a stable Iraq. The poverty stricken local population were bribed with promises of bounties for killing coalition force soldiers. The insurgents, mainly non Iraqis, are slaughtering innocents in an attempt to destabilise the country and start a civil war.
Hezbollah have been armed with an estimated 15,000 Iranian missiles, paid for, and transported through Syria & Lebanon. Someone is making a lot of money out of this. As yet they have no interest in dialogue. Destruction of Israel is their only reason for existence. There is even an outstanding UN resolution calling for them to be disarmed
Fledgling democracies in the Middle East are nothing like what we understand as one man one vote democracies. The population vote en mass on religious and tribal reasons for parties with single issue anti-western/Israeli manifestos. Hamas now have political power and have to run a country. Let’s see if they can do so. I hope they can make the jump to pursuing their aims politically.
Hezbollah had 17% of the Lebanese vote (I think). A country that was beginning to free itself from Syrian/Iranian control and now is dragged back into the nihilistic mire that is Hezbollah’s aims. But that is all Israeli, US & UK’s fault according to many.
The largest "democracy" in the area is clearly Iran. A country that recently elected an extreme leader by any measure and is now bent on a road of Israeli US conflict.
Terrorism is exactly what is the word says. The spreading of terror. Quite frankly the US/UK state terrorism argument is old hat and subjective. Two wrongs do not make a right and there is nothing justifiable about randomly targeting innocent civilians with suicide bombs etc. It is the apologist approach of damming UK/US/Israeli actions and in effect condoning terrorist actions that has a bad taste to many. The real targets of terrorists are not the poor individuals slaughtered. Rather the real targets are you & I. Terrorists use the press to magnify their effect out of all proportion to their real capabilities in the soft underbelly that is western public opinion which gives them the oxygen of publicity they need to survive (and make lots of money). Its easy to sit in you armchair and be an apologist for Hezbollah et al then scream for somebody to protect you when you or your family is directly in the terrorist firing line. Try using some dialogue then. These terrorist groups have no interest in real dialogue and until they do we just have to defend ourselves best we can.
Cant believe I spent time writing this in a Racing Forum
OK so the Hezbollah are not firing from civilian houses.
There were not over 100 missiles fired from the locality of the UN base or the Qana tragedy around the time off and in the days prior to them being hit.
Hezbollah are not firing indiscriminately against innocent civilians on the Israeli side of the border.
The Lebanese infrastructure is not being targeted by Israel as part of a long term strategy to oust Hezbollah. It is the Israelis that are just trying to kill as many innocent civilians as they can.
Hezbollah can do what they want because they are the good guys. US, UK & Israel are all baddies.
Think I understand now because these are the "facts".
Think I will get back to horse racing now.<br>
 <br>Actually there were only a few rockets today compared with 100s over the previous days. As I said before the Israeli strategy is clearly flawed, but probably only in the short term. In the long term it may have the effect of making the point to the Lebanese people if you allow these terrorists in your country then that is what will happen when they attack Israel in this way.
At least the Israeli’s are trying to minimise civilian casualties whereas Hezbollah are firing randomly in the hope of killing as many innocent civilians as possible.
As a general rule of thumb I do tend to consider terrorists and anyone who deliberately targets innocent civilians’ bad guys
I think insomniac is spot on.
I cannot understand all this UK/US/Israeli bashing to the extent that criminal actions by terrorist groups are excused and tolerated and they are seen as the good guys. We all live in democracies where we elect politicians to make decisions to represent our national interests. We have the luxury of being able to criticise our governments and vote them out if we disagree with the choices they have made. Spookily enough the interests of UK/US & Israel often coincide against the interests of a number of non democratic countries and terrorist organisations.
Blair & Bush will clearly agree on much. Does that make them wrong? In the case of the Iraq war only the Liberals & SNP were anti-war. I am certain that a conservative PM would probably have had an even cosier relationship with the US and make exactly the same decisions as Blair made based on the evidence they had. Once the US goes to war invariably we will follow whether that is Blair, Cameron or any other Labour/Conservative politician in power. On a global level Russia, China, France etc continually block UN Reponses in the UN. Nothing new there.
I do not think from a strategy perspective that it is in anyone’s interest other than Hezbollah to have a ceasefire. I think it is important that we look to solve the problem i.e. get rid of Hezbollah rather than treating the symptoms. That is what everyone appears to be working towards now. A long term solution. Hezbollah will not like that because they cannot exist in a peaceful Middle East.
In you analogy Dave the reason that the UK would not respond to a French attack in a similar manner is because we are talking about a one off incident. If however the froggies had been doing this for 30 years plus i.e. supporting and arming a terrorist group whose stated aim is the destruction of the UK then I think you would see probably a much bigger response from the UK akin to all out war. However we know that unlike Lebanon the French would not tolerate and nurture the existence of any such group on their territory. Hezbollah are a bunch or heavily armed Militia whose only aim is the destruction of Israel. How do you negotiate with that?
One thing I do agree with you on Dave is “to indiscrimately kill women and children is an act of barbarism, irregardless of which side of the fence you are sittingâ€ÂÂ
Thanks trackside,
I agree with all you say. I am pobably appearing as if I am on only one side here. That is not the case. Reading through this thread it appeared to be very one sided and anti-Israeli, American & British policy. Just pointing out there is another side to this conflict. Lebanon was nearly there and now Hezbollah have destroyed any chance of peace in the short term.
We can be armchair politicians all we like but we do not have a fraction of the facts that the decision makers have.
War is not a computer game and mistakes happen. I think in the first Iraqi war the Americans killed more British troops than the Iraqis. The technology is getting better but when the Hezbollah hide in amongst the civilain population to fire their weapons civilians will get killed. I blame that on Hezbollah.
Thanks for the chat. Off to bed now.
Dave,
I do not know what targets they are firing at and why. Neither will anyone on here know such information. I do know as a professional army they will not deliberately target civilians and will act on whatever intelligence or evidence they have. Not a nicety that Hezbollah terrorists need worry about.
Are the civilians in Israel legitimate targets for 100 or so missiles a day randomly lobbed in their direction? I think many people forget that terrorist targets are not the people who are directly killed or injured by their actions. The real targets are the world wide audience watching it all on TV.
We see this war though the press and what they want us to see. I think the Israeli strategy was to target and destroy the Hezbollah positions and destroy the Lebanese infrastructure in the south hoping that the Lebanese people would blame Hezbollah for binging all this trouble to a country that was just starting to prosper and regain some normality. Clearly that has not happened and they now appear to be being drawn back into Lebanon. Nihilism is the all that Hezbollah have to offer.<br>
I wonder what the British government’s reaction and UK public opinion would be to a "terrorist" organisation lobing over 100 missiles a day into the UK from a neighbouring country? Or how it would treat a neighbouring country that harbours terrorists bent on destroying the UK, allowing them to ship in missiles & arms for that purpose.
Hezbollah state that they have been planning this for six years since the Israelis moved out of southern Lebanon. Hezbollah are accepted by the people in southern Lebanon. They hide amongst the local population and fire their rockets from schools & hospitals. The school hit in Qana had been the firing base of over 100 missiles over the previous week.
If a ceasefire is called then the terrorists will just regroup and start again. I find it incredible that Hezbollah start this conflict and suddenly Israel are the bad guys. Clearly this is Syria (& Iran) influence trying to destablise Lebanon which was just starting to prosper after they kicked the Syrians out.
Until Lebanon can rid itself of Hezbollah, Syrian and Iranian interference then it is destined to reap what it sows. The UN force have been totally useless so far. I do not see how they plan to do any better next time.
