SO16_Saint Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12566254 What exactly have we / he done wrong to apologise?? Is it that we've taken too long to get people out, or that were taking people out at all?? confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 I think, not certain, but BA stopped flying into Tripoli last Thursday, this should have set alarms ringing in government particularly given the recent unrest in other north African countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 I think he is apologising for the time taken for the govt. to get their arse into gear. A lot of other countries had already started evacuating their nationals, whilst our lot were still sat around the lounges in Whithall chatting about it. Then the plane chartered (just the one) to get our chaps & chapesses out was sat at Gatwick with 'technical problems'. It appears the penny has finally dropped & the government have now realised that something does need to be done, and have (I believe) sent a couple of Hercules transporters out as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Thsi government has turned out to be a colossal disappointment. Ineptness and cluelessness abound... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SO16_Saint Posted 24 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 24 February, 2011 it wasn't exactly the most clear cut report ever produced! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 it wasn't exactly the most clear cut report ever produced! No you're right, it was very confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Britain's policy on this has always been to keep commercial flights going as long as possible rather than mobilise charter flights 'early' like other countries do. A fairly sound policy unless the commercial flights are cancelled at short notice. A bit of a tricky balancing act I would venture. Refreshing to hear a prime minister use the 'sorry' word though. Mssrs Brown and Blair take note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Turkey had evacuated 6,000 people by the time our first charter fight took off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Damned if he does something damned if he doesnt. Nothing is ever straight forward in getting people repatriated from a situation like that. I remember back in the eighties evacuating brits back from lebanon. its was an absolute logistical night mare. its one thing evacuating them but it is the process the other end that is paramount. Do we have somewhere to but refugees, then there health care oh and not to forget counsellors. Im sure the russians just went in took them out and dumped them somewhere. Remember the UK is the really touchy feeely fluffy nation and we need to have everything in place. What is not being announced on the news that there are thousands of brits staying put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Saintandy The turks may have done that but they were a lot closer and used ferry's to get them off libya The indias I think have 11k indian nationals in libya. have they got the ability to rehouse them back in india? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Saintandy The turks may have done that but they were a lot closer and used ferry's to get them off libya The indias I think have 11k indian nationals in libya. have they got the ability to rehouse them back in india? True true, though other countries have been a lot quicker off the mark than us. At the same time though, oil workers out there knew the risks when they took up the job and are probably getting paid a lot to be out there. Nevertheless, we can't just leave them there in these dessert camps without food or water and at danger of a local militia attack at all times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Thsi government has turned out to be a colossal disappointment. Ineptness and cluelessness abound... For some this is not a surprise. Regardless of the colour of ribbon the successful donkey is wearing, history's lesson is that we just get 'same old same old'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickn Posted 24 February, 2011 Share Posted 24 February, 2011 Saintandy The turks may have done that but they were a lot closer and used ferry's to get them off libya The indias I think have 11k indian nationals in libya. have they got the ability to rehouse them back in india? No, I think they're coming here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 What exactly are the Brits 'escaping' from? has there been mass widespread murder of foreign nationals. If there has, I missed that news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 What exactly are the Brits 'escaping' from? has there been mass widespread murder of foreign nationals. If there has, I missed that news. There hasn't. But being in an active war zone isn't a lifestyle choice. And expats must be saved. They are the world's most precious commodity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Why is the government always to blame? Whilst if it is dangerous, these people go to these jobs for big wages and when it goes a bit pear shaped they whine and blame the government for not getting them out. They would have known over a week ago that things were getting heated and should have moved their arses then and taken personal responsibilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Considering that we spend countless millions on our Intelligence services, shouldn't they have predicted some of this? What exactly do MI6 do for their money. Of course they can't say 'cos it's secret. How convenient. It seems that every foreign event (Kuwait in the 90's, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya) takes us by surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 The problem with this Government is they are making too many errors, due to Ministers inexperience hence the number of U turns we have seen over the last few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Hmmmm, the rumblings of threats of Milatary Intervention... what do people think of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Perhaps Brown should now apoligise for him Blair and the previous Labour Govt doing "all it could to facilitate" the release of the Lockerbie murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 (edited) Perhaps Brown should now apoligise for him Blair and the previous Labour Govt doing "all it could to facilitate" the release of the Lockerbie murderer. Let's be honest though. Al Megrahi didn't really do it, he was just the fall man for the real criminal. The real criminal and perpetrator is Gaddafi, but everyone was happy to forget that for his oil and the stability he brought to the area through brutal suppression of his people. It brings me some satisfaction he will reach a bloody end in the next few days or weeks, and too bloody late as well. Personally, I'd like to see him captured, tried and chucked in jail. Death is always the easy way out for these kinds of people. Edited 25 February, 2011 by Saintandy666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Hmmmm, the rumblings of threats of Milatary Intervention... what do people think of that? It's a quick easy way to get rid of Cameron/Clegg. I presume Miliband will be installed shortly afterwards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Let's be honest though. Al Megrahi didn't really do it, he was just the fall man for the real criminal. The real criminal and perpetrator is Gaddafi, but everyone was happy to forget that for his oil and the stability he brought to the area through brutal suppression of his people. It brings me some satisfaction he will reach a bloody end in the next few days or weeks, and too bloody late as well. "Everyone?" You mean "everyone in the last Cabinet, including the 2 Ed's." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 "Everyone?" You mean "everyone in the last Cabinet, including the 2 Ed's." Yes, I did mean them as well. The Tories were no better. This is a totally non-partisan point. Everyone is as bad as each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 The real criminal and perpetrator is Gaddafi, Is this the bloke? Wonder who Brown's advisors were at the time, wasn't it the two Eds? It's a bit rich claiming the Tories were as bad, Labour was in power, they should apoligise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Is this the bloke? Wonder who Brown's advisors were at the time, wasn't it the two Eds? It's a bit rich claiming the Tories were as bad, Labour was in power, they should apoligise. Yes. But this hardly a party political point. Tory and Labour governments for years up right until now have happily supported him in power and taken his oil to prop him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so22saint Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 my mate's sister was on the plane. bet his family are hoping for a "swinging from a lamp post" Mussolini moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 Yes. But this hardly a party political point. Tory and Labour governments for years up right until now have happily supported him in power and taken his oil to prop him up. It's a political point when the Labour Govt "did all it could" to free a mass murderer who was convicted and serving time in a UK jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 25 February, 2011 Share Posted 25 February, 2011 It's a political point when the Labour Govt "did all it could" to free a mass murderer who was convicted and serving time in a UK jail. Well, he wasn't really the real person behind this. What really needs to happen is for Gaddafi to go down. And in all honesty, Cameron and Co. were only against his release because they were in opposition and it was a good opportunity for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Well, he wasn't really the real person behind this. What really needs to happen is for Gaddafi to go down. And in all honesty, Cameron and Co. were only against his release because they were in opposition and it was a good opportunity for them. Perhaps we should have just made you judge and jury. Believe it or not people were against this decision on the basis that they disagreed with it. They disagreed with the UK govt "doing all it could" to release this man.Why do lefties always think they have the moral high ground and that when people oppose them it's for the wrong reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Let's be honest though. Al Megrahi didn't really do it, he was just the fall man for the real criminal. The real criminal and perpetrator is Gaddafi, but everyone was happy to forget that for his oil and the stability he brought to the area through brutal suppression of his people. It brings me some satisfaction he will reach a bloody end in the next few days or weeks, and too bloody late as well. Personally, I'd like to see him captured, tried and chucked in jail. Death is always the easy way out for these kinds of people. You say "he didn't really do it" and use that as some sort of excuse why your type of leadership did all it could to release him He is a mass murderer and terrorist. You can't excuse his actions because you believe someone told him to do it?? Should I get away with going on a shooting killing spree if someone told be to do it? And in your live and let live world. Do you think Gaddafi will get anything sort of a fair trial if it goes down that route? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Perhaps we should have just made you judge and jury. Believe it or not people were against this decision on the basis that they disagreed with it. They disagreed with the UK govt "doing all it could" to release this man.Why do lefties always think they have the moral high ground and that when people oppose them it's for the wrong reasons. Lefties are generally Socialists and Socialism is all about jumped up busy bodies trying to control everything. What they say goes and anyone who dares to think differently is the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Did anyone see that idiot Peter Hain on Question time? He was running down the Tories for having defence Companies accompany Cameron to the middle east. Dimble than quite correctly pointed out the millions and millions of pounds worth of weapons that were sold to Libya under his Govt. His reply was that there were rules in place that meant the arms sold under Labour were done on the basis that they're not to be used on their own people.He summed up the whole hypocrisy of the Labour Party over this.They go on about an ethical foregin policy, but cosy up to people like Gaddafi, sell arms to nutters and invade foregin countries on the basis of a made up report. Hain wanted to have his cake and eat it and if he really believes Gaddafi's henchmen decide which gun to use to shoot protesters based on a agreement with the Labour party, he's even more bonkers than I thought.I can see it now "go onto the streets and shoot the Infidel's, no you can't take that gun, use this one, that one is part of our agreement with those peaceful Labour people" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Yes. But this hardly a party political point. Tory and Labour governments for years up right until now have happily supported him in power and taken his oil to prop him up. You only have to look back through recent history to show that the "establishment" are more than happy to do deals, fraternise and trade with a whole host of despots, irresepctive of whether Downing Street is red or blue. IMHO, from Pinochet & Thatcher to Gadaffi & Brown, we've never been that convincing with regards our morality once away from our shores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 You only have to look back through recent history to show that the "establishment" are more than happy to do deals, fraternise and trade with a whole host of despots, irresepctive of whether Downing Street is red or blue. IMHO, from Pinochet & Thatcher to Gadaffi & Brown, we've never been that convincing with regards our morality once away from our shores. True, but the Tories don't bang on about an ethical foregin policy, claim the weapons sold under them are not used on the people and try and paint themselves whiter than white. Their approach has always been, "he maybe a mad despot, but he's our mad despot".It's stright and you know where you stand.Labour want it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 What is interesting. HMS Cumberland is on its way back to Libya to extract more Brits after already moving hundreds. That ship along with the other 3 type 22 frigates are getting scrapped early for defence cuts. I really do wonder if we could do this again when these ships Are gone 4 type 22 frigates 2 type 42 destroyers HMS Ark Royal And others being put on "extended readiness" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 You only have to look back through recent history to show that the "establishment" are more than happy to do deals, fraternise and trade with a whole host of despots, irresepctive of whether Downing Street is red or blue. IMHO, from Pinochet & Thatcher to Gadaffi & Brown, we've never been that convincing with regards our morality once away from our shores. Agreed. The British defence industry is deeply rooted in Whitehall and Whitehall is deeply rooted in the defence industry. The appalling terms of trade in the carriers contracts have everything to do with these cosy relationships and practically nothing to do with political parties. In a way, Labour is even more spooked by defence-industry lobbying (often done by ex-civil servants) to the effect that ' if you block deal X, it is against British national interests.' It is this unbelievably hypocritical and cynical - and quite false - equivalence between the interests of the defence industry and the national good that has led to a situation where we suddenly 'discover' that British weaponry and defence technology is turned on the citizenry of Middle Eastern dictatorships, despite cast-iron 'guarantees' (!) that they wouldn't be. And we lap this garbage up. Such is the effectiveness of the defence industry lobbyists in perpetuating this myth that we even have had threads on lowly football message boards decrying the threat of prosecution against BAe for corruption in dealing with these same (now thankfully tumbling) potentates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 True, but the Tories don't bang on about an ethical foregin policy, Let's not be so naive to think that the Tories (as well as every other Political Party) have what they say is an ethical foreign policy and yet are happy to ignore it if they think its "in the UKs Interests" to do so. And if you don't think the current Government don't bang on about "ethical" and a foreign policy with a "conscience" and then try to trade off of it, then go back to last Summer/Autumn when Hague gave a number of speeches spelling out that the current Foreign Policy would have a conscience etc etc etc (with many commentators agreeing that he was saying much the same as Robin Cook before him in the late 90's). PS Margaret Thatcher's 1999 conference speech on Pinochet does not give a feel that he is "our mad despot". She was bigging him up massively!!! http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/108383 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 (edited) You say "he didn't really do it" and use that as some sort of excuse why your type of leadership did all it could to release him He is a mass murderer and terrorist. You can't excuse his actions because you believe someone told him to do it?? Should I get away with going on a shooting killing spree if someone told be to do it? And in your live and let live world. Do you think Gaddafi will get anything sort of a fair trial if it goes down that route? There are strong doubts whether he was even involved. The main witness having CIA connections and receiving a $4m dollar "reward". Edited 26 February, 2011 by ecuk268 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Agreed. The British defence industry is deeply rooted in Whitehall and Whitehall is deeply rooted in the defence industry. The appalling terms of trade in the carriers contracts have everything to do with these cosy relationships and practically nothing to do with political parties. In a way, Labour is even more spooked by defence-industry lobbying (often done by ex-civil servants) to the effect that ' if you block deal X, it is against British national interests.' It is this unbelievably hypocritical and cynical - and quite false - equivalence between the interests of the defence industry and the national good that has led to a situation where we suddenly 'discover' that British weaponry and defence technology is turned on the citizenry of Middle Eastern dictatorships, despite cast-iron 'guarantees' (!) that they wouldn't be. And we lap this garbage up. Such is the effectiveness of the defence industry lobbyists in perpetuating this myth that we even have had threads on lowly football message boards decrying the threat of prosecution against BAe for corruption in dealing with these same (now thankfully tumbling) potentates. We lost a massive defence contract to the Yanks and French a few months back as we tried to be ethical about bribes (to us it is seen as a bribe , in the Arab world part of life) It was worth billions of pounds, im sure all the moralists will be happily tucked up in bed while the people in the defence industry lose their jobs and have the worries that go with it. It is OK being Mary Poppins if you live in a cossetted world of job security and you know there will always be money on the table for food etc. but when the moralists go into the real world, it is dog eat dog and dont think the emerging nations will give a flying f### about how the weapons are being used when they want the contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Al Megrahi is the fall the man for Libya. Whether he should have been released or not depends on your values of compassion. If Megrahi had died a few weeks after he was released more people would be happy, but the fact he still lives creates issues. I'm not arguing for or against his release here. On that matter, where the hell is Megrahi, has anyone seen any evidence that he is actually still alive?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Over a 1,000 people killed now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 We lost a massive defence contract to the Yanks and French a few months back as we tried to be ethical about bribes (to us it is seen as a bribe , in the Arab world part of life) It was worth billions of pounds, im sure all the moralists will be happily tucked up in bed while the people in the defence industry lose their jobs and have the worries that go with it. It is OK being Mary Poppins if you live in a cossetted world of job security and you know there will always be money on the table for food etc. but when the moralists go into the real world, it is dog eat dog and dont think the emerging nations will give a flying f### about how the weapons are being used when they want the contracts That would be some kind of argument (a dishonest one) if any of it were true. It isn't. British companies bribe with the worst of them. So you're presumably happy, nonetheless, to see this cosy, corrupt dealmaking continue so long as it's 'good for Britain' when these UK-built weapons are turned on unarmed street demonmstrators and citizens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 That would be some kind of argument (a dishonest one) if any of it were true. It isn't. British companies bribe with the worst of them. So you're presumably happy, nonetheless, to see this cosy, corrupt dealmaking continue so long as it's 'good for Britain' when these UK-built weapons are turned on unarmed street demonmstrators and citizens? well we lost a massive contract with the Saudis due to our authorities a few months back. Dubai Phil will give you more info. A citizen can be killed by a Chinese French or US bullet as well as British ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 well we lost a massive contract with the Saudis due to our authorities a few months back. Dubai Phil will give you more info. A citizen can be killed by a Chinese French or US bullet as well as British ones. I know we lost it, and I'm extremely happy to hear that. The Saudi regime is THE largest exporter and financier of Islamist terrorism by far. Why the **** would you want to support such a colossally corrupt and violently medieval regime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 We lost a massive defence contract to the Yanks and French a few months back as we tried to be ethical about bribes (to us it is seen as a bribe , in the Arab world part of life) It was worth billions of pounds, im sure all the moralists will be happily tucked up in bed while the people in the defence industry lose their jobs and have the worries that go with it. It is OK being Mary Poppins if you live in a cossetted world of job security and you know there will always be money on the table for food etc. but when the moralists go into the real world, it is dog eat dog and dont think the emerging nations will give a flying f### about how the weapons are being used when they want the contracts Quite right. A Blue Peter badge does not keep people in work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 I know we lost it, and I'm extremely happy to hear that. The Saudi regime is THE largest exporter and financier of Islamist terrorism by far. Why the **** would you want to support such a colossally corrupt and violently medieval regime? Just because you sell them arms does not mean that you support them. I am sure the famillies of the Vickers workers do not share your self righteous indulgence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 Just because you sell them arms does not mean that you support them. I am sure the famillies of the Vickers workers do not share your self righteous indulgence. I'm sure the victims of 7/7 and their families do not share your suffocatingly smug insularity. The Saudis actively finance Islamist extremism throughout the Muslim world with huge funds for madrassas. In Pakistan, Saudi-funded extremist schools have displaced state-funded mass education altogether in large parts of the country. Out of these schools, and others like them in other countries like Bangladesh and Somalia, will come a steady stream of 7/7 and 9/11 imitators - all fired up by a Saudi-approved violent hatred of anyone not fully signed up to Wahhabism. These madrassas are the very places that create the mindset that people like us - you - are worthy of nothing more than a slow, painful apostate death. And these are the mindsets that the Saudi have set out explcitly to create, in order to expand what was once only a medieval backwater of mainstream Islam. The Saudis aren't just some other tinpot dictatorship; they are wreaking havoc around the world. but that's okay with you because a few British jobs can be saved. How very magnanimous of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 26 February, 2011 Share Posted 26 February, 2011 I'm sure the victims of 7/7 and their families do not share your suffocatingly smug insularity. The Saudis actively finance Islamist extremism throughout the Muslim world with huge funds for madrassas. In Pakistan, Saudi-funded extremist schools have displaced state-funded mass education altogether in large parts of the country. Out of these schools, and others like them in other countries like Bangladesh and Somalia, will come a steady stream of 7/7 and 9/11 imitators - all fired up by a Saudi-approved violent hatred of anyone not fully signed up to Wahhabism. These madrassas are the very places that create the mindset that people like us - you - are worthy of nothing more than a slow, painful apostate death. And these are the mindsets that the Saudi have set out explcitly to create, in order to expand what was once only a medieval backwater of mainstream Islam. The Saudis aren't just some other tinpot dictatorship; they are wreaking havoc around the world. but that's okay with you because a few British jobs can be saved. How very magnanimous of you. Do you ever read Pseud's corner in private eye? 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