Sheaf Saint Posted 15 June, 2009 Share Posted 15 June, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8100432.stm No public inquiry into the Iraq war. Now who'd have thought that eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain saint Posted 15 June, 2009 Share Posted 15 June, 2009 (edited) Deleted! Edited 15 June, 2009 by spain saint sorry had a witty reply but wrong thread! shame on me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 15 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 15 June, 2009 Are we signing Gordon Brown or are you posting on the wrong forum? I'm sorry you seem to be a little confused. This is The Lounge. HTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain saint Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Hence my shame and hasty retreat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8100432.stm No public inquiry into the Iraq war. Now who'd have thought that eh? Why should there be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 you cant have a public enquirey people need to be able to speak without the press being all over them..people need to be able to spill the beans not to mention the security aspect of war operations and how we go about the lead up to a conflict ...there has been no public enuirerly since WW2 what purpose would it serve if it was public??? that 45 mins threat was a lie blair etc duped us the public was against it etc etc etc dont we already know all this..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 you cant have a public enquirey people need to be able to speak without the press being all over them..people need to be able to spill the beans not to mention the security aspect of war operations and how we go about the lead up to a conflict ...there has been no public enuirerly since WW2 what purpose would it serve if it was public??? that 45 mins threat was a lie blair etc duped us the public was against it etc etc etc dont we already know all this..? LOL! And when will the results of this Private Investigation be made public? How will we know that those taking part have a. Been rigorously questioned? and b. Been free of any influence as to what their honest answer should be? The way things are with Governments and National Security we''ll probably get a curt response. Such like: " That scientist who 'committed suicide' gave us all erroneous information which we acted upon in good faith" "So there!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 16 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Why should there be? Because the british public deserve to know the truth of why we were dragged into an illegal war on extremely suspicious pretenses. We have a right to know exactly what our politicians' motives were. A private enquiry will just ensure that they can make sure that certain information remains concealed forever, and that no-one will ever know just how suspect the information was. And does anybody actually believe that David Kelly killed himself? A public inquiry might get to the bottom of that as well, but no, the govt has just made sure that their own worthless hides will be protected by a private, politically-driven inquiry; as opposed to a public, independent one. I don't know why I should expect anything else really. It just saddens me that certain people are never going to be held accountable for their questionable actions which, so far, have resulted in the deaths of 650,000 Iraqis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Because the british public deserve to know the truth of why we were dragged into an illegal war on extremely suspicious pretenses. We have a right to know exactly what our politicians' motives were. A private enquiry will just ensure that they can make sure that certain information remains concealed forever, and that no-one will ever know just how suspect the information was. And does anybody actually believe that David Kelly killed himself? A public inquiry might get to the bottom of that as well, but no, the govt has just made sure that their own worthless hides will be protected by a private, politically-driven inquiry; as opposed to a public, independent one. I don't know why I should expect anything else really. It just saddens me that certain people are never going to be held accountable for their questionable actions which, so far, have resulted in the deaths of 650,000 Iraqis. Where did you get this figure from or is this the figure from Saddam's reign in which case is nearer 1 million deaths. By the way I was in the first gulf war and a lot of the iraqi prisoners we took didn't want to be part of the war but had no choice (except death). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Why should there be? Exactly. We're British and we can invade who the **** we like IMO. We don't need to justify our actions to anyone, let alone a few trampy protestors and commie tree huggers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 16 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Where did you get this figure from or is this the figure from Saddam's reign in which case is nearer 1 million deaths. By the way I was in the first gulf war and a lot of the iraqi prisoners we took didn't want to be part of the war but had no choice (except death). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442_pf.html I don't doubt for a second that most Iraqis didn't want to be part of the war. If truth be told, they probably never wanted to join the army but were forced to against their will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff leopard Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 what purpose would it serve if it was public??? that 45 mins threat was a lie blair etc duped us the public was against it etc etc etc dont we already know all this..? don't forget 'they lied about its legality and then they even lied about discussing its legality' Yes we do know this and its an insult to all of us to see the guilty parties still in power or making millions on the lecture circuit talking about spreading peace. And what about the journalist who was thrown to the wolves for clearly printing the truth about the sexed-up dossier. And what about the families of everyone who has died as a result of an illegal botched war which made the world a much more dangerous place (including those injured and killed in the london bombings). Or we can just let it go until the next illegal, immoral, and frankly farcical war comes along? To their credit, the public won't accept a conclusion of 'yes..mistakes were made but we can't talk about them because it’s a secret and they'll make the world hate us even more than they do already'. Without a transparent enquiry, the public will never trust its ministers or armed forces again, for good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 you call it illegal...but it will save certain countries from whipping the price of oil sky high (much higher than now) in years to come.. we did it simply to safe guard our future of oil...simple. or would you be happy paying £3 a litre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 how many other wars and conflicts are thrashed out in the public...the aftermath that is...WW2 and that was about it..even then, i bet only a tiny percentage of what went on (behind the scenes) was made public really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 if the truth came out Blair could be put up before the war trials tribunal. it will never be published too many imprtant people would be for the chop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Without a transparent enquiry, the public will never trust its ministers or armed forces again, for good reason. what have we got to do with it...we do as we are told and are another department/servant of the powers at whitehall :confused::confused::confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 don't forget 'they lied about its legality and then they even lied about discussing its legality' Yes we do know this and its an insult to all of us to see the guilty parties still in power or making millions on the lecture circuit talking about spreading peace. And what about the journalist who was thrown to the wolves for clearly printing the truth about the sexed-up dossier. And what about the families of everyone who has died as a result of an illegal botched war which made the world a much more dangerous place (including those injured and killed in the london bombings). Or we can just let it go until the next illegal, immoral, and frankly farcical war comes along? To their credit, the public won't accept a conclusion of 'yes..mistakes were made but we can't talk about them because it’s a secret and they'll make the world hate us even more than they do already'. Without a transparent enquiry, the public will never trust its ministers or armed forces again, for good reason. You having a laugh? The British population is right behind UK Forces despite individuals stance on the legality of the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 16 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 16 June, 2009 you call it illegal...but it will save certain countries from whipping the price of oil sky high (much higher than now) in years to come.. we did it simply to safe guard our future of oil...simple. or would you be happy paying £3 a litre So you think it is OK for 650,000 civilians to be killed just so that the population of a few countries thousands of miles away don't have to pay too much for petrol? And anyway, I don't believe that was the case - quite the opposite in fact. Iraq has the worlds second or third (can't quite remember which) largest supply of oil, and the OPEC cartel didn't like the idea that so much oil was in the hands of somebody who was not part of their price-fixing racket, and could easily undercut them throughout the world by offering that oil at a much lower price. So far from keeping the price of oil down, I believe that it was more about keeping the price of oil artificially high by taking it out of Saddam's control, and thereby securing the continued obscene profits of the western oil companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff leopard Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 we did it simply to safe guard our future of oil...simple. or would you be happy paying £3 a litre i don't drive or fly, so there's no blood on these hands I'd have more respect if they did just say that, 'we did it because in a few years time China would have instead, and who would you rather have the oil?' Its just the constant lies and their claiming the moral high ground the whole time that drives people mad. You having a laugh? The British population is right behind UK Forces despite individuals stance on the legality of the war. Really? This would make an interesting poll, because I've never bought into the argument of 'never criticise the brave boyz'. I'm sure plenty of proud German parents never would have dreamt that their offspring where capable of committing genocide (not that I'm comparing our troops to Nazi's, (now Israel, that’s a different story)). I'm think there is a small percentage of decent people out there trying to do the right thing, and another small percentage of absolute scum who enjoy abusing the locals, but the army is an institutionally racist institution, and quite frankly, these are the last people I want representing me abroad. :confused::confused::confused: submariners excepted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 i Really? This would make an interesting poll, because I've never bought into the argument of 'never criticise the brave boyz'. I'm sure plenty of proud German parents never would have dreamt that their offspring where capable of committing genocide (not that I'm comparing our troops to Nazi's, (now Israel, that’s a different story)). then if we are not comparing us to the nazis (thanks for that) then what is the problem? why would you NOT trust the armed forces.. be worth remembering that the next time there is a massive farming disease or the firemen go on strike again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 You can understand why TDD and the others want the enquiry held in secret. Id feel a bit of a c*nt if it came out that I played a part in an illegal war that my fellow citizens wanted no part of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 You can understand why TDD and the others want the enquiry held in secret. Id feel a bit of a c*nt if it came out that I played a part in an illegal war that my fellow citizens wanted no part of. i was part of it unless i need an enquirey to tell me that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 i was part of it unless i need an enquirey to tell me that Dont get me wrong TDD, I have the utmost respect for you and enjoy reading your "hush hush" postings from under the water (bet you could tell us a few things) But, if I was in your position, I would at least want to feel that the job I was doing was just and moral, that we were "the good guys" saving the world. I wouldnt want an enquiry to blow all that out of the water. I would hate to know that I (along with the rest of the Armed forces) have been duped as well; and used a pawns in a war over control of the worlds future resources. Morally, I would want to feel that my country was behind what I was doing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 personally...I am past caring, I get paid well enough for what I do and that does me (at least till i get to the 12 year mark in 2 years time and think about jacking it in) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 personally...I am past caring, I get paid well enough for what I do and that does me (at least till i get to the 12 year mark in 2 years time and think about jacking it in) Then what do you plan t do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Then what do you plan t do? get a job maybe...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Here's a few tips for when you leave.... 1. Sleep on the shelf in your closet. Replace closet door with curtain. 6 hrs after you go to sleep, have your wife whip open the curtain, shine a flashlight in your eyes, and mumble "sorry...wrong rack" 2. Don't eat any food not from a can or that you don't have to add water to. 3. Spend as much time indoors as possible and avoid sunlight. Hang out in dark theaters, windowless buildings, and closets. 4. Renovate your bathroom. Build a wall across the middle of your tub and move shower head to chest level. During showers, shut off water while soaping. 5. Repeat back everything anyone says to you. 6. Sit in your car for 6 hrs a day with your hands on the wheel, the motor running, but don't go anywhere. 7. Put lube oil in your humidifier instead of water and set it to high. 8. Don't watch TV (except movies in the middle of the night). Have family vote on which movie to watch, then show a different one. 9. Only do your laundry in the most crowded laundromat you can find. 10. Leave lawnmower running in living room 6 hrs a day. 11. Have the paperboy give you a haircut. 12. Take hourly readings on your electric and water meters. 13. Sleep with your dirty laundry. 14. Invite guests, but don't have enough food for them. 15. Buy a broken exercise bike and strap it to your kitchen floor. 16. Buy a trash compactor and use it weekly. Store garbage in other side of tub. 17. Wake up every night at midnight and have a PB&J on stale bread (optional: canned ravioli or cold soup) 18. Make up menu a week in advance without looking in cabinets or frig. 19. Set alarm to go off at random times during the night. Jump out of bed and dress as quickly as you can, then run in the yard and grap the garden hose. 20. Once a month, take every appliance apart and put back together. 21. Use 18 scoops of coffee per pot and allow to sit 5-6 hrs before drinking. 22. Invite 85 people you don't really like to visit for a few months. 23. Store your eggs in your garage for 2 months and then cook a dozen each morning. 24. Install a fluorescent lamp on the bottom of your coffee table and lie under it to read. 25. Check you frig compressor for sound shorts. 26. Put a complicated lock on your basement door and wear the key around your neck. 27. Lockwire the lugnuts on your car. 28. When baking a cake, prop up one side of the pan. Then spread the icing really thick on one side to level off the top. 29. Every so often, yell emergency deep. Run to the kitchen and sweep all pots/pans/dishes off the counter onto the floor. Then yell at your wife for not having the place stowed for sea. 30. Wear headphones. Go stand in front of your stove. Say to no one in particular, "stove manned and ready". Stand there for a few hours. Say to one on in particular, "stove secured". Roll up headphone chord and put away. 31. Write a work package to change the oil in your car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team-saint Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 Exactly. We're British and we can invade who the **** we like IMO. We don't need to justify our actions to anyone, let alone a few trampy protestors and commie tree huggers. I never suspected you would think that Stanley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 get a job maybe...? BOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 (edited) BOL. believe it or not...people that work on subs (in the main) are highly trained and have a technical background.. a couple of people in my very trade and my level have left for MI5..!!! some for GCHQ..as I have very very high security clearance.. also, I am the IS manager on board. IE i manage the boats intranet and everything IT and have all the civvy qualifications to back it up... I have national diplomas in management that civvies pay ££££ thousands to get..through my leadership/command courses that i have done... so yes, when you get to the level I am at you ARE very qualified to do many jobs, hence why there is a retention problem in my branch and why I get paid quite highly for it.... Seriously, I have not known anyone in my trade from subs who has done 10-13 years plus and not got at least a decent job when leaving.. jesus, my mate has just left for a job in luxemburg working in IT... another option is the new nuclear power stations in the pipeline. these people will take ANY uk submariner for jobs as they have nuclear experience at all levels Edited 16 June, 2009 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 I'm think there is a small percentage of decent people out there trying to do the right thing, and another small percentage of absolute scum who enjoy abusing the locals, but the army is an institutionally racist institution, and quite frankly, these are the last people I want representing me abroad. You're either on a wind up or a complete idiot. Have you served in the forces? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 hmmmm im not too sure that war was totally unjust.... i mean, saddam was a tyrant and DID cause chaos in his country and murdered 1000's.. if that happened in europe (again) would we let it go...? err, no. throw the oil he was sitting on into the mix.....the rest is history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guan 2.0 Posted 16 June, 2009 Share Posted 16 June, 2009 hmmmm i'm not too sure that war was totally unjust.... i mean, Saddam was a tyrant and DID cause chaos in his country and murdered 1000's.. if that happened in europe (again) would we let it go...? err, no. throw the oil he was sitting on into the mix.....the rest is history No, we wouldn't. But we probably wouldn't lie either. We would go through the proper procedures, with our allies (all of them) keeping the public briefed on what was happening, explaining and showing fully the reasons for our presence being necessary. The Commons would vote on the decison to go to war, if this was the case. We wouldn't sex up a document, make up some bull**** about the country's leader being best buds with Osama Bin laden when they hated each other, Nick some royal prerogative powers from the Queen in order to declare war without the support of Parliament, **** off half the world, be Americas *****, railroad through measures and ignore or deride as cowardly any country that opposes us instead of at least listening to their arguments, go in under eqquiped and briefed, costing soldiers their life for the sake of The PM's hard on for Bush, make up non exsistant evidence to fit the cause, Label anybody who questioned the lies as a 'traitor to their country' and a terrorist sympathiser, then when it becomes clear that there are no WMD's/ Saddam-Bin Laden Alliances, point to the cluster**** of a warzone that is Iraq , and say, "We've brought peace to the region, that's good though innit? So stop moaning". Or you would hope not. Because they didn't know better, they called it 'civilization,' when it was part of their slavery To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff leopard Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 You're either on a wind up or a complete idiot. Have you served in the forces? Are you saying racism in the British army isn't endemic, that Commonwealth soldiers aren't racially abused on a regular basis? Ha! Here's my proof, you freaking clown… three things normal society gave up decades ago, using the term N*gger using the term P*ki laughing at Jim Davidson the only people that cling on to this way of life are white van drivers, the mentally ill, the police, and the armed forces. ithankyou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 jeff you simply have no idea what you are on about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 Are you saying racism in the British army isn't endemic, that Commonwealth soldiers aren't racially abused on a regular basis? Ha! Here's my proof, you freaking clown… three things normal society gave up decades ago, using the term N*gger using the term P*ki laughing at Jim Davidson the only people that cling on to this way of life are white van drivers, the mentally ill, the police, and the armed forces. ithankyou You haven't got a fecking clue have you. Answer my question, DID YOU OR HAVE YOU SERVED IN THE FORCES TO WITNESS ALL SERVICE PERSONAL TO BE RACIST. Every government body and industry has it's element of 'bad eggs' but to suggest every one of the forces are racist show's what an idiot you are. As for Jim Davidson he is not in the armed forces but is very funny and ther term paki is someone from Pakistan. Please feel free to post real instances of all the armed forces being racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 Jim Davidson is not very funny. That's all I'm prepared to say on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 Jim Davidson is not very funny. That's all I'm prepared to say on the subject. What are your feelings on Russ Abbott? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 Well, he wasn't the greatest comedian of all time, even in his peak, but I can't recall him being offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 Well, he wasn't the greatest comedian of all time, even in his peak, but I can't recall him being offensive. I am sure the Scot's would disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff leopard Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 jeff you simply have no idea what you are on about I admit that my opions are based on things i've read, things i've heard second hand from people and seen via the media, as opposed to being based on first hand experience in the forces. You'll probably laugh but I was in the air cadets for years and years, and visited airbases and did this and that and it was great fun. But there was always an under-lying racist attitude, usually relating to a hilarious jim davidson tape someone had. Some of the marching songs were appallingly racist, but as a 13/14 year old I sung along and thought they were funny. But I'm proud to say that I grew out of it. And I've seen what squadies are like when they're out on the razz and I stand by the comment that these are the last people I want representing me abroad. But more generally, by various accounts, the British grunts on the front line aren't as bad as the Americans for over-reacting and cultural ignorance. I have no doubt that every one of them is primarily concerned with getting out alive, and then making sure all their fellow troops also get out in one piece. And as the Iraq War and Israel/Palestine have shown, this approach to occupation leads to high civilian causalities and a lot of bad blood with the locals for generations to come. (And this is partially based on 'Generation Kill', the brilliant warts and all account of the latest Iraq War by the people who did The Wire.) And to suggest that the armed services are behind the rest of society in regards to race, is that really so crazy? Its an enormous institution, rooted in rituals and tradition, after all. Answer my question, DID YOU OR HAVE YOU SERVED IN THE FORCES TO WITNESS ALL SERVICE PERSONAL TO BE RACIST. that's just crazy shouting Every government body and industry has it's element of 'bad eggs' but to suggest every one of the forces are racist show's what an idiot you are. As for Jim Davidson he is not in the armed forces but is very funny and ther term paki is someone from Pakistan. Please feel free to post real instances of all the armed forces being racist. a quick google search quickly leads you to... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/69507.stm Which points out that great improvements have been made in regards to race. Fair point. Read between the lines though and it paints a picture of an racist institution being dragged into line with society. And next, from 2007 http://www.24dash.com/news/Central_Government/2007-03-20-UK-armed-forces-accused-of-institutional-racism Labour MP accuses the UK's armed forces of being institutionally racist. He's clearly insane. Something on the radio this morning, a worryingly high percentage of troops from the Common Wealth falling prey to crippling pain induced by damp and cold climates. This is just the another chapter in the conflict between the UK armed forces and coloured troops from Common Wealth nations, who complain that their treatment is based on racial stereotypes and abuse. Playground stuff, basically. So the army is getting its own house in order, but if they treat their fellow troops so badly for not being British, I shudder at the thought of how they inter-act with the locals, in which ever country they have the enormous misfortune to meet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 17 June, 2009 Share Posted 17 June, 2009 jeff I cant remember the last time i watched a jim davidson vid/dvd or know anyone who has.. sooooooo i cant say we have that sort of material lying around.. jeff...i live and breath the "institution" daily and i can assure you... racism etc is NOT visible in todays forces.. sure, no one is perfect and i have no doubt there are racists within the forces (like every single part of society) but as an employer/organisation....it simply is not the case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 18 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 18 June, 2009 Looks like GB will be forced into a re-think on this... Link here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now