So, Brits. What ya gonna do?

Upchurch said:
Aw, man. You mean I gotta pay more taxes?!?
Click to expand...

Hey upchurch, the relatively recently laxed gun laws in Mo. would they allow one to carry a sword? Or is it just guns? I've tried to find out but I couldn't really tell.
 
LawnOven said:
Hey upchurch, the relatively recently laxed gun laws in Mo. would they allow one to carry a sword? Or is it just guns? I've tried to find out but I couldn't really tell.
Click to expand...
I have no idea. I didn't even know we relaxed our gun laws.

I do know that the police will get pissy with you if you start carrying around a sword on the streets during Halloween 7-8 years ago.


eta: alternatively, a buddy and I would fence in the park for exercise and the cops never gave us any problems about it, but they would slow down as they drove by.
 
BPSCG said:
That's funny. Your entire contribution to this thread has been a stream of ad homs heavily salted with statements of opinion unburdened by a single fact to back them up. Mr. Pot, say hello to Mr. Kettle. Oh well. Time to move on; nothing to see here.
Click to expand...
A rather dishonest characterization of yours, BPSCG, but I can't say I'm surprised. Better luck with your trolling elsewhere.
 
Just in case anyone reading this is genuinely not understanding the point I was making by quoting the Chicago Sun Times piece, or is totally put off by Steyn's bitchy theater critic style, here is a regular news report from the (UK) Telegraph:

Buoyant Teheran warns of further kidnappings

The bullish reaction from Teheran will reinforce the fears of western diplomats and military officials that more kidnap attempts may be planned.

The British handling of the crisis has been regarded with some concern in Washington, and a Pentagon defence official told The Sunday Telegraph: "The fear now is that this could be the first of many. If the Brits don't change their rules of engagement, the Iranians could take more hostages almost at will.

...

"Iran has got what it wants. They have secured free passage for smuggling weapons into Iraq without a fight," one US defence department official said.

It is also clear that the Iranian government believes that the outcome has strengthened its position over such contentious issues as its nuclear programme. Hardliners within the regime have been lining up to crow about Britain's humiliation, and indicated that the operation was planned.

...
Click to expand...


A note of optimism, however:

...

However, a British Government official familiar with the negotiations said that while the abductions had provided Ahmadinejad with a platform from which to humiliate the West, such behaviour would have undermined Iran's ambitions for its nuclear programme. Countries which might otherwise have supported Iran would now be questioning whether a regime that took hostages could be trusted with sensitive nuclear technology.

...
Click to expand...


Here's a way to stop Iran (assuming that is what is desired):

Lets "question" them.

And if that doesn't work, we can escalate the situation by "deploring" them.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:
Threatening to kill them, parading them before the cameras, showing that they could do so with impunity, etc.
Click to expand...

I am seriously not being obtuse on purpose but how is that "humbling"?

Some of our armed forces were arrested (and you can claim that is legal or not it makes no difference to what actually happened), the country that captured them showed them on TV, kept hold of them for just a fortnight and then let them go. This type of event could happen to any country and is happening to the UK all the time. Just a few weeks ago there was the story of the kidnappings in Ethiopia,, a British journalist was kidnapped in Palestine a few weeks ago. I just don't see how this is "humbling".
 
Abdul Alhazred said:
Here's a way to stop Iran (assuming that is what is desired):

Lets "question" them.

And if that doesn't work, we can escalate the situation by "deploring" them.
Click to expand...

I asked before, but got ignored. Which operations in Iraq and Afghanistan should be halted in order to free up resources to engage Iran?

The op asks us what will we do, i ask again, what would you have us do?

Until you can offer a realistic alternative to negotiation and diplomacy, this is nothing but empty bluster on your part. Which I gather is a treat which you deplore.

Or do you prefer to just throw your hands up and chant "something must be done."?
 
brodski said:
I asked before, but got ignored. Which operations in Iraq and Afghanistan should be halted in order to free up resources to engage Iran?

The op asks us what will we do, i ask again, what would you have us do?

Until you can offer a realistic alternative to negotiation and diplomacy, this is nothing but empty bluster on your part. Which I gather is a treat which you deplore.

Or do you prefer to just throw your hands up and chant "something must be done."?
Click to expand...

EU could impose sanctions on Iran which would severely affect Iran's economy.
 
Grammatron said:
EU could impose sanctions on Iran which would severely affect Iran's economy.
Click to expand...
Possibly, however most of the people who i have seen calling for "something to be done" (tm) are also the ones that mocked the use of sanctions against Iraq. Has there been a change in right wing American attitudes to sanctions?
Going by Stynes ode to Lord Palmerstone it looks like a lot more than economic sanctions is what is being demanded.


Also Sanctions are most likely to hurt the civilian population rather than the leadership which gives rise to the danger that sanctions could fuel anti western feeling in the population of Iran, shoring up the popularity of the current Regime.
 
brodski said:
Possibly, however most of the people who i have seen calling for "something to be done" (tm) are also the ones that mocked the use of sanctions against Iraq. Has there been a change in right wing American attitudes to sanctions?
Going by Stynes ode to Lord Palmerstone it looks like a lot more than economic sanctions is what is being demanded.


Also Sanctions are most likely to hurt the civilian population rather than the leadership which gives rise to the danger that sanctions could fuel anti western feeling in the population of Iran, shoring up the popularity of the current Regime.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I think the Iranian population is a bit more "aware" of the world than Iraqi's was. Also at least there is some form of opposition in Iran's government where in Iraq they would be 6ft under.

I don't want to see a military response to what Iran did, but something else has to be done. Targeted sanctions might seem very appropriate, particularly if all of EU is in on it.
 
Bruce said:
So I take it that everyone is just "okay" with these events. No biggie, huh? Yesterdays news. Water off a duck's back.


Wow. Just....wow. :boggled:
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Not everyone here is as eager to stoop to Ahmadinejad's level as you.
 
brodski said:
"Tony Bliar" is the close ally of "BusHitler".
I doubt it was a typo, as this joke/ spelling is often seen on "politcal" t-shirts and the like.
Click to expand...

Yeah - it's interesting, isn't it - he gets called this by people on the political Right, and by people on the political Left.

One thing you have to give the man - he has managed to unite probably 5/6 of this country (in a visceral hatred of him, if in nothing else).

:)
 
Wat Tyler said:
Yeah - it's interesting, isn't it - he gets called this by people on the political Right, and by people on the political Left.

One thing you have to give the man - he has managed to unite probably 5/6 of this country (in a visceral hatred of him, if in nothing else).

:)
Click to expand...

he's a rightwing leader of a leftwing party, of course he's goign to get shot from bith sides.

What I find really funny though are the people who see Brown and espeicaly prescott as more left wing than Blair.
havign a regional accent != leftwing.
;)
 
Grammatron said:
Perhaps, but I think the Iranian population is a bit more "aware" of the world than Iraqi's was. Also at least there is some form of opposition in Iran's government where in Iraq they would be 6ft under.

I don't want to see a military response to what Iran did, but something else has to be done. Targeted sanctions might seem very appropriate, particularly if all of EU is in on it.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with much of this this (which means that I’m not tonally sure if this is the politics forum or not ;) ) . However given the political situation (much of it caused by the anger at the UK's presence in Iraq) this is not a realist option.
And the one of the few things worse than doing nothing is threatening to do something which we cannot follow through with.
 
Bruce said:
So I take it that everyone is just "okay" with these events. No biggie, huh? Yesterdays news. Water off a duck's back.


Wow. Just....wow. :boggled:
Click to expand...
Is there any chance whatsoever of the USA actually catching the guy who perpetrated one of the biggest terrorist acts instead ofa proven record of total failure in doing so.

How many GI's does it take to catch one guy in pyjamas? More than all the GI's and all the satellite surveillance and marine power and airborne power and military intelligence(sic) the US has on this earth or fullers it seems.

Are you Ok with that Bruce? Water off a ducks back? No biggie, huh? Yesterdays news

Wow.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom