Thrown together in a hurry. I’ll tart this up and polish it later.
March 13th. 2006.
Why 800 British troops out of Iraq now?
I reckon this is to give a British force time to prepare for deployment alongside US forces when they go into Iran. 800 troops mean nothing militarily but it’s important America is not seen to be acting unilaterally when it invades Iran. There were originally 46,000 British troops in Iraq. After these 800 troops are withdrawn, there will be just 7,000 though I think 10,000 troops just went off to Afghanistan where the Taliban, so it appears, are far from a spent force. I bet there are hectic preparations going on for invading Iran but I don’t know how many British troops will be going into Iran. I’d guess a lot more than 800!
I wonder what odds William Hill will give on conscription being re-introduced within the next 10 years?
What’s the rush?Fears that Iran might have an atom bomb before the end of the year. Where’s the evidence? There isn’t any. Iran is doing nothing illegal.
But what civil war about Iraq?
If Britain and the US cared what happened to Iraq and the Iraqi people, they’d never have invaded in the first place. If British and America troops pull out of Iraq too early and civil unrest increases, some nations (India I bet) might foolishly contribute troops to replace those US and British troops that have left. This would free up more British and American troops for use in Iran and probably, eventually, Syria and of course Afghanistan and Iraq as situations demand.
As long as there are enough troops in Iraq to protect oil exports, oil production installations, US military bases and government offices, the occupying US and British forces don’t care what happens to the Iraqi people and I’d be very surprised if none of the bomb outrages in Iraq the mass media tries to subliminally link to Shia, Baathist or Sunni “insurgents” were not committed by the US and British “special forces”. It’s much easier to control a country the size of Iraq if the population are busy fighting each other rather than uniting against the occupying forces. Books banned for sale in the UK explain how the British Army was doing that in Northern Ireland for years for slightly different reasons.
Compared to filling the Iraqi desert with depleted uranium from spent munitions and the number of uncounted civilian casualties from the war, letting off a few bombs a mosques is no big deal. It’s all part of the game. Divide and rule.
Why Blair is unfit to govern.
Either he’s so easily fooled and so unaware of what’s going on in the world, even though he’s to got access to the best information and has god knows how many people working for him OR he knew exactly what he was trying to do when he took the UK into Iraq.
He really thought Saddam was a threat?
Well I can’t see where Saddam was supposed to be hiding these weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) especially when the British and American Air Forces had been enforcing a “no fly” zone over Iraq’s own airspace since the end of the first gulf war. Allegedly, Britain and The US knew where Saddam had radar and anti aircraft gun installations but when it comes to chemical weapons factories and laboratories, they suddenly don’t know anything that’s going on in Iraq. They did however know that years of sanctions had made it almost impossible to for Saddam to achieve anything.
Come on Mr. Blair! Years of sanctions and no fly zones and Saddam’s a threat?
I remember before the war hearing a German intelligence officer saying on BBC Radio they didn’t believe Iraq and Saddam posed a threat. I seem to remember something similar after the Hutton enquiry as well. I also remember British and America saying most of the world’s intelligence agencies thought Saddam was a threat. Another lie.
So why did we go into Iraq?Because we could and Iraq was a weak country sitting on huge oil reserves. Have you ever heard Tony Blair mention the words “oil” and “Iraq” in the same sentence? I haven’t! Perhaps the planning for the invasion of Iraq started at the UN with the imposition of sanctions, weakening Iraq to the extent it couldn’t defend itself against the US and Britain.
The big lies.
What is the definition of having a WMD manufacturing capability? Your average garden shed has enough pesticides and fertilisers to make biological weapons. Some
garden products ARE biological weapons. A bunch of Castor Beans and a pestel and mortar can be used to produce WMDs.
The Iranians have been accused by the US of having a Cuban built biological weapons facility outside Tehran. The Iranians call it a vaccine manufacturing facility. The Cubans are adept at producing vaccines and the industrial processes for producing vaccines and biological weapons are very similar. This is like me saying that because you have a loaf of bread in one hand and bread knife in the other, it’s clear you intend to murder someone with the knife and you have to be disarmed.
I’ve never heard of the Cubans being accused of manufacturing huge quantities of biological weapons in their facilities but then again, they don’t have any oil do they.
Why doesn’t the US deal with North Korea, a country which allegedly has missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons to west coast of the US? Because there isn’t any oil there that interests America (for now) and they have a huge army. The message the UK and the US are sending the rest of he world is “if you’re strong, we’ll leave you alone. If you’re weak and have a load of oil, we’re coming to get you”
Darfur?
I could go on like this for ages and it won’t make any difference. Just go to google and type “darfur””US””aid” and if you’re feeling brave, type in “College of The Americas” and “Fort”. That should do it.
Cheers!
March 13th. 2006.
Why 800 British troops out of Iraq now?
I reckon this is to give a British force time to prepare for deployment alongside US forces when they go into Iran. 800 troops mean nothing militarily but it’s important America is not seen to be acting unilaterally when it invades Iran. There were originally 46,000 British troops in Iraq. After these 800 troops are withdrawn, there will be just 7,000 though I think 10,000 troops just went off to Afghanistan where the Taliban, so it appears, are far from a spent force. I bet there are hectic preparations going on for invading Iran but I don’t know how many British troops will be going into Iran. I’d guess a lot more than 800!
I wonder what odds William Hill will give on conscription being re-introduced within the next 10 years?
What’s the rush?Fears that Iran might have an atom bomb before the end of the year. Where’s the evidence? There isn’t any. Iran is doing nothing illegal.
But what civil war about Iraq?
If Britain and the US cared what happened to Iraq and the Iraqi people, they’d never have invaded in the first place. If British and America troops pull out of Iraq too early and civil unrest increases, some nations (India I bet) might foolishly contribute troops to replace those US and British troops that have left. This would free up more British and American troops for use in Iran and probably, eventually, Syria and of course Afghanistan and Iraq as situations demand.
As long as there are enough troops in Iraq to protect oil exports, oil production installations, US military bases and government offices, the occupying US and British forces don’t care what happens to the Iraqi people and I’d be very surprised if none of the bomb outrages in Iraq the mass media tries to subliminally link to Shia, Baathist or Sunni “insurgents” were not committed by the US and British “special forces”. It’s much easier to control a country the size of Iraq if the population are busy fighting each other rather than uniting against the occupying forces. Books banned for sale in the UK explain how the British Army was doing that in Northern Ireland for years for slightly different reasons.
Compared to filling the Iraqi desert with depleted uranium from spent munitions and the number of uncounted civilian casualties from the war, letting off a few bombs a mosques is no big deal. It’s all part of the game. Divide and rule.
Why Blair is unfit to govern.
Either he’s so easily fooled and so unaware of what’s going on in the world, even though he’s to got access to the best information and has god knows how many people working for him OR he knew exactly what he was trying to do when he took the UK into Iraq.
He really thought Saddam was a threat?
Well I can’t see where Saddam was supposed to be hiding these weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) especially when the British and American Air Forces had been enforcing a “no fly” zone over Iraq’s own airspace since the end of the first gulf war. Allegedly, Britain and The US knew where Saddam had radar and anti aircraft gun installations but when it comes to chemical weapons factories and laboratories, they suddenly don’t know anything that’s going on in Iraq. They did however know that years of sanctions had made it almost impossible to for Saddam to achieve anything.
Come on Mr. Blair! Years of sanctions and no fly zones and Saddam’s a threat?
I remember before the war hearing a German intelligence officer saying on BBC Radio they didn’t believe Iraq and Saddam posed a threat. I seem to remember something similar after the Hutton enquiry as well. I also remember British and America saying most of the world’s intelligence agencies thought Saddam was a threat. Another lie.
So why did we go into Iraq?Because we could and Iraq was a weak country sitting on huge oil reserves. Have you ever heard Tony Blair mention the words “oil” and “Iraq” in the same sentence? I haven’t! Perhaps the planning for the invasion of Iraq started at the UN with the imposition of sanctions, weakening Iraq to the extent it couldn’t defend itself against the US and Britain.
The big lies.
What is the definition of having a WMD manufacturing capability? Your average garden shed has enough pesticides and fertilisers to make biological weapons. Some
garden products ARE biological weapons. A bunch of Castor Beans and a pestel and mortar can be used to produce WMDs.
The Iranians have been accused by the US of having a Cuban built biological weapons facility outside Tehran. The Iranians call it a vaccine manufacturing facility. The Cubans are adept at producing vaccines and the industrial processes for producing vaccines and biological weapons are very similar. This is like me saying that because you have a loaf of bread in one hand and bread knife in the other, it’s clear you intend to murder someone with the knife and you have to be disarmed.
I’ve never heard of the Cubans being accused of manufacturing huge quantities of biological weapons in their facilities but then again, they don’t have any oil do they.
Why doesn’t the US deal with North Korea, a country which allegedly has missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons to west coast of the US? Because there isn’t any oil there that interests America (for now) and they have a huge army. The message the UK and the US are sending the rest of he world is “if you’re strong, we’ll leave you alone. If you’re weak and have a load of oil, we’re coming to get you”
Darfur?
I could go on like this for ages and it won’t make any difference. Just go to google and type “darfur””US””aid” and if you’re feeling brave, type in “College of The Americas” and “Fort”. That should do it.
Cheers!
posted by You Know Who at 11:32 AM
0 comments
