Posts by searcher

posted

159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

So, the situation as it stands seems to be.........I (insert posters name) will make any statements I want and you (all posters) will beleive me 100% without me offering a shred of proof.

If 'someone' asks for information out of interest, they will be told 'do your own research'.

OK, I got that.

My reason for asking questions was that I am genuinely interested in other peoples opinions and why they hold them, they may even change my mind about what I think, should I actually HOLD an opinion on the subject.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

*Go do your own research.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

Hm, under74, did you mean JOHN O'Neil the FBI man?
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

Searcher: I'm refering to foreign policy which contributes to massive inequality and injustice and the premature deaths of 30,000+ children under 5 EVERY DAY

I agree that each country should stay out of other countries affairs, no interference (especially disguised as 'aid') whatsoever. I would go further, every person should live in the country of their birth, swearing only loyalty to that country and that countries laws, if that necessitates relocation, then so be it.
Why waqs it delayed? Why too little too late? The only explanations are that the US is completely inept and incapable of organising anything or that it was deliberate. Take your pick.
In either case there should be froof available, please show.
under74,
I am unfamiliar with Jim O'Neill, I will research this, thank you.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

*They should have insisted on justice rather than revenge and gone after Osama. I believe that they deliberately allowed him to escape. They don't want him to go because he is the only reason they remain in power.*
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

Searcher,
How about Bush going after the real culprit of terrorism ( Osama Bin Laden)

oldflame,
Here is my answer to that on page 5 of this thread (to under74), the question in my reply has not yet been answered.
1. found osama bin laden instead of picking fights with everyone else.
Fair one. Then what? What to do with him, execute (kill) him and he becomes a martyr. Imprison him and hostages are taken for his release.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

As this whole 'war on terrorism', 'weapons of mass destruction', 'invade this or that country' etc thing all started after the events of 9/11. What do people think should have happened in response, instead of what Bush did?

Am I to understand then that NO-ONE has a viable alternative to what Bush did?

C'mon people, I have read all the comments about how Bush is/was wrong, and why, lets hear some alternatives.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

1. found osama bin laden instead of picking fights with everyone else.
Fair one. Then what? What to do with him, execute (kill) him and he becomes a martyr. Imprison him and hostages are taken for his release.
2. started talking with the rest of the world instead of holding guns to it. It's hard for people to treat you respectfully after you've threatened to bomb the hell out of them.
Talk is always best, IMO, as long as BOTH sides want to talk. Doesnt always happen that way though.
3. stop treating profits better than people.
In THIS world? Never has happened, never going to happen, historically, in ANY country profit/property has ALWAYS been treated as more important than people, no matter WHO is in power.
4. change policies that are outdated and damaging.
I agree. Change them to what?
Not sure if the second part of your post is addressed to me or is a general comment.
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

As this whole 'war on terrorism', 'weapons of mass destruction', 'invade this or that country' etc thing all started after the events of 9/11. What do people think should have happened in response, instead of what Bush did?
159
2,000 US and 25,000 civilians now dead in Iraq
by Simon in
1. social
2. current
.

what a waste .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4376812.stm.
searcher

As this whole 'war on terrorism', 'weapons of mass destruction', 'invade this or that country' etc thing all started after the events of 9/11. What do people think should have happened in response, instead of what Bush did?