Are our political "leaders" liars or idiots ?

[somerset]

Yes I am. Eventually, although too late, we acted.

Sorry, I thought we acted in September 1939,..... maybe you can enlighten me when we did actually act?

 

[Dandyman]

Yes I am. Eventually, although too late, we acted.

After the war the UK (and USA) also blocked the entry of most Jewish DPs while allowing Nazi collaborators and war criminals into the country.

 

[Dandyman]

Sorry, I thought we acted in September 1939,..... maybe you can enlighten me when we did actually act?

We were both talking about action to save Europe's Jews from genocide. That was not why the British Empire went to war, nor did it ever feature very highly in any war aims.

 

[Stoo82]

We were both talking about action to save Europe's Jews from genocide. That was not why the British Empire went to war, nor did it ever feature very highly in any war aims.

So the total destruction of the Nazi regime was not a war aim?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Sorry, I thought we acted in September 1939,..... maybe you can enlighten me when we did actually act?

We acted due to the invasion of Poland not the Nazi persecution / slaughter of Jews previously.

 

[somerset]

Because the only power in the Middle East left, apart from Israel, is Iran, and they support the Syrian government.
.

Iran is no more a power, than Iraq was during either Gulf War. They, on paper, have plenty of men in uniform, and some older generation 'eastern bloc' air and sea power, but they have a very weak command and control infrastructure, their forces are split along political loyalties, and any medium level western nation with decent stand-off capability would see them off without putting too many boots on the ground. Their power is simply in their ability to agitate and support militia and terrorist activities, that might dish out a few localised bloody noses, but would hardly cause a stir amongst the Nato nations.

 

[somerset]

We acted due to the invasion of Poland not the Nazi persecution / slaughter of Jews previously.

The social persecution of Jews started in about 1935, the slaughter didn't until 1940/41 well after we were already up to our armpits in the struggle.

 

[Dandyman]

The social persecution of Jews started in about 1935, the slaughter didn't until 1940/41 well after we were already up to our armpits in the struggle.

The fully industrialised mass murder started in 1941 but Jews were being murdered in large numbers from the invasion of Poland onwards including the period of the "Phony War".

 

[HovaGirl]

Because the only power in the Middle East left, apart from Israel, is Iran, and they support the Syrian government.

If I was a conspiracist, I would be look at a nuclear sub that has just bobbed up in Gibraltar, look at the situation, wonder whether that was all fabricated by the Spanish and British to get said sub in the Med with a prefab to show its self as a warning to Spanish Government when in reality it is showing the Syrian Government we mean business and not to retaliate 'too much'.

Well thought out. You're a good strategist.

 

[HovaGirl]

Iran is no more a power, than Iraq was during either Gulf War. They, on paper, have plenty of men in uniform, and some older generation 'eastern bloc' air and sea power, but they have a very weak command and control infrastructure, their forces are split along political loyalties, and any medium level western nation with decent stand-off capability would see them off without putting too many boots on the ground. Their power is simply in their ability to agitate and support militia and terrorist activities, that might dish out a few localised bloody noses, but would hardly cause a stir amongst the Nato nations.

I think you underestimate Iran's potential for power.

 

[hybrid_x]

oh look a lefty being pompous snobbish smug self satisfied and elitist ...what a refreshing scenario! .....and you my bedwetting soppy liberal keep getting your worldview from al jazeera the guardian and bbc ...cos like they dont have a leftist agenda do they ! your rent a quote predictable default position are as tedious as your "everybodies sheeple" except for you attitude . I bet your a trustafrian with shitlocks and a st pauli t shirt innit blaaaad

i am not a lefty or a liberal....i don't get involved in the illusion of left v right that makes you believe democracy is real and alive. e.g Blair was not left...but lefty's thought he was as he was under the label and umbrella of 'labor.'

how i look is irrelevant, but the way i look and dress pretty much ensures i blend in wherever i go, can fit in anywhere with anyone, and no labels jump out from me - this by coincidence dovetails with some old rosicrucian wisdom.

but you however, give away some of who you are by your avatar, and i have a feeling if someone saw you - labels would fly out the sky and stick to you....in a case where judgements would not be needed as out of your pores would drip the essense of a right wing, pro-war, daily mail reading pr1ck.


if you think someone on a forum going against corporate murder, gives them dreadlocks in your mental image, then you are a sad individual......toxic....and need to be quarantined or something.

 

[Czechmate]

When the Americans are involved there is always a behind the scenes agenda , and remember the only source the Yanks go on at the moment is from Israel and we always ass lick as normal . As was said on Newsnight last night by three MP's that we should tell USA to hold on , think about the situation and think out a strategy for a beginning and middle and an end , I know it's difficult and people are dying but we need to be diplomatic , sensible and not let it evolve into another Iraq/Afghanistan .

It was also admitted by the Yanks that they have their own agenda with time scales and if necessary won't seek approval from the UN . Bloody ridiculous , stop playing cowboys and Indians and grow up !! They may not even wait for our decision in parliament .

 

[Westdene Seagull]

They may not even wait for our decision in parliament .

They will - they won't take any military action until the UN inspectors have left.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

10 years after the disaster of Iraq, the political class are now trying to talk up an invasion of Syria.

Lunacy or the post 1990 lack of any restraints on Imperialism ? (or both?)

Given that they haven't even mentioned an invasion of Syria I'd hazard that the greatest liars or idiots aren't in this case the politicians.

 

[brightonrock]

i am not a lefty or a liberal....

Here's the thing. That attack on you was stupid and simplistic, no doubt. But there's a reason you are perceived this way, and why you're ignored or ridiculed so much. Because you have (and believe) a CT for EVERY. SINGLE. EVENT. And when you present it to NSC, you link to unsubstantiated, unverified, unproven websites with little or no evidential proof of your argument, often CT blogs or half-baked youtube videos scrappily edited together on windows movie maker.

You say you want to discuss the theories or 'proof' you're putting forward, but when it's easily debunked or discredited you dodge the issue. Case in point: post 39 of this thread. You choose not to believe the 'western msm' out of principle, but choose to believe an article which uses the (pro-assad) russian government controlled media as an apparently impartial source. And again, post 46 - a perfectly reasonable and plausible explanation for the apparent time difference you use as central to your argument. You haven't replied to those posts. You haven't entered into the dialogue you supposedly crave because it doesn't suit your agenda.

You display all the classic, stereotypical characteristics of a tinfoil hatted conspiracy theorist - you're evasive, you're defensive, you post links with NO sources and NO proof which you believe without question over a MSM source like BBC or Sky, just because of what they are. No matter the subject or context, you point blank discredit anything and everything from those sources and believe any alternative source that you want to believe on principle. You never trust anything said by any person, company or institution in a position of influence and you believe they ALL have plans on world domination. I doubt you'll respond but if you do, try to at least respond to the points being made - it would be to your credit and would make you look less of a paranoid nutter.

FWIW: I'm not convinced the assad regime is necessarily behind it - I think the chemical attack is more or less irrefutable, but it isn't as clear who is responsible. Allegedly both sides have access to these materials, and the splintered and contradictory nature of the rebels' separate agendas (pro-democracy, radical islamist etc) make it difficult to discount that some rebel groups wouldn't consider pinning an attack on the assad regime to help their own cause. I think the UN need to be allowed to do their job, but also that the G8 nations have a responsibility to act in the defence of innocent Syrian civilians, however that may be. I'd like to see caution, and for lessons to be learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, but if the alternative is watching children slaughtered with nerve agents, then get some boots on the ground and show assad and the religious extremists looking to destabilise the whole region just what real power is.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Here's the thing. That attack on you was stupid and simplistic, no doubt. But there's a reason you are perceived this way, and why you're ignored or ridiculed so much. Because you have (and believe) a CT for EVERY. SINGLE. EVENT. And when you present it to NSC, you link to unsubstantiated, unverified, unproven websites with little or no evidential proof of your argument, often CT blogs or half-baked youtube videos scrappily edited together on windows movie maker.

You say you want to discuss the theories or 'proof' you're putting forward, but when it's easily debunked or discredited you dodge the issue. Case in point: post 39 of this thread. You choose not to believe the 'western msm' out of principle, but choose to believe an article which uses the (pro-assad) russian government controlled media as an apparently impartial source. And again, post 46 - a perfectly reasonable and plausible explanation for the apparent time difference you use as central to your argument. You haven't replied to those posts. You haven't entered into the dialogue you supposedly crave because it doesn't suit your agenda.

You display all the classic, stereotypical characteristics of a tinfoil hatted conspiracy theorist - you're evasive, you're defensive, you post links with NO sources and NO proof which you believe without question over a MSM source like BBC or Sky, just because of what they are. No matter the subject or context, you point blank discredit anything and everything from those sources and believe any alternative source that you want to believe on principle. You never trust anything said by any person, company or institution in a position of influence and you believe they ALL have plans on world domination. I doubt you'll respond but if you do, try to at least respond to the points being made - it would be to your credit and would make you look less of a paranoid nutter.

FWIW: I'm not convinced the assad regime is necessarily behind it - I think the chemical attack is more or less irrefutable, but it isn't as clear who is responsible. Allegedly both sides have access to these materials, and the splintered and contradictory nature of the rebels' separate agendas (pro-democracy, radical islamist etc) make it difficult to discount that some rebel groups wouldn't consider pinning an attack on the assad regime to help their own cause. I think the UN need to be allowed to do their job, but also that the G8 nations have a responsibility to act in the defence of innocent Syrian civilians, however that may be. I'd like to see caution, and for lessons to be learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, but if the alternative is watching children slaughtered with nerve agents, then get some boots on the ground and show assad and the religious extremists looking to destabilise the whole region just what real power is.

as i said...he is Blue Peter and I am still waiting for my £5 reward

 

[somerset]

Here's the thing. That attack on you was stupid and simplistic, no doubt. But there's a reason you are perceived this way, and why you're ignored or ridiculed so much. Because you have (and believe) a CT for EVERY. SINGLE. EVENT. And when you present it to NSC, you link to unsubstantiated, unverified, unproven websites with little or no evidential proof of your argument, often CT blogs or half-baked youtube videos scrappily edited together on windows movie maker.

You say you want to discuss the theories or 'proof' you're putting forward, but when it's easily debunked or discredited you dodge the issue. Case in point: post 39 of this thread. You choose not to believe the 'western msm' out of principle, but choose to believe an article which uses the (pro-assad) russian government controlled media as an apparently impartial source. And again, post 46 - a perfectly reasonable and plausible explanation for the apparent time difference you use as central to your argument. You haven't replied to those posts. You haven't entered into the dialogue you supposedly crave because it doesn't suit your agenda.

You display all the classic, stereotypical characteristics of a tinfoil hatted conspiracy theorist - you're evasive, you're defensive, you post links with NO sources and NO proof which you believe without question over a MSM source like BBC or Sky, just because of what they are. No matter the subject or context, you point blank discredit anything and everything from those sources and believe any alternative source that you want to believe on principle. You never trust anything said by any person, company or institution in a position of influence and you believe they ALL have plans on world domination. I doubt you'll respond but if you do, try to at least respond to the points being made - it would be to your credit and would make you look less of a paranoid nutter.

FWIW: I'm not convinced the assad regime is necessarily behind it - I think the chemical attack is more or less irrefutable, but it isn't as clear who is responsible. Allegedly both sides have access to these materials, and the splintered and contradictory nature of the rebels' separate agendas (pro-democracy, radical islamist etc) make it difficult to discount that some rebel groups wouldn't consider pinning an attack on the assad regime to help their own cause. I think the UN need to be allowed to do their job, but also that the G8 nations have a responsibility to act in the defence of innocent Syrian civilians, however that may be. I'd like to see caution, and for lessons to be learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, but if the alternative is watching children slaughtered with nerve agents, then get some boots on the ground and show assad and the religious extremists looking to destabilise the whole region just what real power is.

Pretty good...

 

[KZNSeagull]

as i said...he is Blue Peter and I am still waiting for my £5 reward

The username Falmer springs to mind as well.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

The username Falmer springs to mind as well.

and "Brunswick"

 

[keaton]

Iraq was invaded on a lie. Afghanistan was just revenge for 9/11. Syria on the other hand is increasingly looking similar to the Nazi attacks against Jews. I personally would feel very uncomfortable if we turned our backs.

The Jews weren't fighting or committing war crimes back. I can't see anything genoicidal about Syria just the usual Middle-east, with artificial borders/country chuff up. The only recent incident where it genoicidal was Sri Lanka and no-one did a thing