tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post1643526616206085289..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Britannia Ruled the WavesIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-62145655934555171292007-04-04T01:28:00.000+01:002007-04-04T01:28:00.000+01:00I Googled for "Verity UK", and I found "14-year-ol...I Googled for "Verity UK", and I found "14-year-old Halifax girl appears in court charged with murder".David Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06839882674758833524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-70040654892026062612007-04-02T20:31:00.000+01:002007-04-02T20:31:00.000+01:00Well done Verity. True to form as usual.Lose the a...Well done Verity. True to form as usual.<BR/><BR/>Lose the argument and resort to abuse. <BR/><BR/>I'm glad that you have chosen not to reply to David Lindsey's posting. Please do me the honour of not responding to this one as well.<BR/><BR/>Having been described by you as the following:-<BR/><BR/>Asshole.<BR/>Established yet chopped up nonentity.<BR/>Prat.<BR/>Prejudiced.<BR/>Patronising.<BR/>Self righteous.<BR/>Preachy.<BR/>Lout.<BR/><BR/>If that's the best you can do I look forward to further intelligent discussion with you at a later date.<BR/><BR/>For the time being, this correspondence is closed.<BR/><BR/>If you think that's patronising, you ain't seen nothing yet dearie.<BR/><BR/>Peace be upon you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-51546559541328723102007-04-02T17:35:00.000+01:002007-04-02T17:35:00.000+01:00V: "I have written many times that we are in Iraq...V: "I have written many times that we are in Iraq not because of WMD,"<BR/><BR/>DL: Well, at least somebody now admits this, I suppose.<BR/><BR/><I> Not "now". I understood from Day One what the point of this war is. I never had the faintest interest in WMD because I understood that this was a sop to people who couldn't get their heads round the need to defeat Wahabbism.</I><BR/><BR/>Re your remarks about Christianity, I think the absolute defeat of islam is a big enough subject. I'm not going to address it in terms of Christianity as that will simply give rise to hostility and furious side-tracking from the fundamentalist atheists who infest Britain today.<BR/><BR/>I know that women always could and always have driven in Iraq, Mr Lindsay. That was the whole point of my simple sentence. <BR/><BR/>Coverage of the war in Iraq has shown images of women routinely driving around. These images have been seen in every home in Saudi Arabia, making it untenable for the House of Saud to continue to ban women from driving. They are now issuing drivers' licences to women. A tiny step forward, but one that has been forced on them by our presence in Iraq.<BR/><BR/>"Unlimited immigration" has never been a stance adopted by neo cons or any other cons. This is strictly a leftist construct to destroy national identities. I thought everyone knew that. Blair and the slithy toves in the cabinet are the ones you should be berating.<BR/><BR/>You are living in a dream world. I have written many times that we will, at some point, have to consider a massive programme of reverse immigration. It's the CNDers like Cherie Blair and other one-worlders you should reserve your toxicity for.<BR/><BR/>Your reading comprehension is very poor and I won't be responding to you again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-17367640113864489532007-04-02T16:58:00.000+01:002007-04-02T16:58:00.000+01:00"Any of which words?"Any at all, it seems."I have ..."Any of which words?"<BR/><BR/>Any at all, it seems.<BR/><BR/>"I have written many times that we are in Iraq not because of WMD,"<BR/><BR/>Well, at least somebody now admits this, I suppose.<BR/><BR/>"but because we have to establish democracies in the ME to counter Wahabbism."<BR/><BR/>But, as I wrote before, liberal democracy arises out of,a nd is ultimately only capable of being sustained by, classical Christianity. As a disciple of Max Shachtman, Leo Strauss, Ayn Rand and the rest (or, more probably, as a disciple of their disciples), you want to de-Christianise (precisely in order to de-democratise and to enslave) the West, even if you are prepared, for popular consumption, to define your own system as Christianity so as to prevent any serious theological critique of it.<BR/><BR/>"I have written that it is working - the Saudis, their people having watched footage on Al-Jazeera nightly that includes women in Iraq routinely driving cards and they have been forced to do a volte face and agree to give driver's licences to women. As a small, easily encapsulated, sample."<BR/><BR/>And that has anything to do with democracy, as such, how, exactly? Women always could and did drive in Iraq (although see below as to for how much longer, thanks to your lot), and in any case, whether by this criterion or in terms of democracy properly so called, your friends the Saudis have a great deal less to commend them than, oh, the Iranians.<BR/><BR/>The unleashing of Wahhabism in the centre of Iraq, and in the south of a strain of Shi'ism which would simply never command popular support in Iran, might yet, and soon, stop women from driving there. That unleashing was the wholly predicatble, and widely predicted, consequence of removing one of the Arab world's two principal bulwarks against such forces. I note that the other such bulwark (in Syria) is also high on the neocon hitlist.<BR/><BR/>All of this is entirely of a piece with the neocon record in 1980s Afghanistan, in 1990s Yugoslavia, and in Pakistan, Chechnya and the Gulf monarchies (especially Saudi Arabia) to this day.<BR/><BR/>"Eurabia becomes more real with each passing day."<BR/><BR/>Thanks to the unlimited immigration advocated by your neocon mates. Logically, of course, there cannot be a global "free" market in goods, services and capital but not in labour. And anyway, you and yours want to Islamise Europe (and then America, seldom mentioned but already well under way) in order to destroy the Christian basis of her culture and thus of her freedom, as well as in order to stke up inter-ethnic tension so as to justify all manner of repressive measures.<BR/><BR/>"Don't patronise me, sweets."<BR/><BR/>Clearly, I don't need to.David Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06839882674758833524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-50829911350988244972007-04-02T16:53:00.000+01:002007-04-02T16:53:00.000+01:00I must have typed the word verification under Nomb...I must have typed the word verification under Nombre de usuario instead of my name.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-44563666319959731072007-04-02T16:15:00.000+01:002007-04-02T16:15:00.000+01:00David Lindsay writes: "Do you actually know what ...David Lindsay writes: "Do you actually know what any of these words mean, Verity?"<BR/><BR/>Any of which words? You didn't specify which words you thought were too arcane for their definitions to be in common currency.<BR/><BR/>Be assured. I understood every word you wrote. What I didn't understand is where on earth you are coming from.<BR/><BR/>I have written many times that we are in Iraq not because of WMD, but because we have to establish democracies in the ME to counter Wahabbism. I have written that it is working - the Saudis, their people having watched footage on Al-Jazeera nightly that includes women in Iraq routinely driving cards and they have been forced to do a volte face and agree to give driver's licences to women. As a small, easily encapsulated, sample.<BR/><BR/>Dhimmitude is what some of us are fighting with vigour, although frankly, it's a losing battle. Eurabia becomes more real with each passing day. If you are interested in dhimmitude, may I commend the books of Oriana Fallaci and Bat Y'eor. I would also comnmend the website dhimmiwatch.<BR/><BR/>Don't patronise me, sweets. You're not up to the job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-6110190294954534042007-04-02T16:01:00.000+01:002007-04-02T16:01:00.000+01:00"The Islam-loving Camel Corps in the FO", writes p..."The Islam-loving Camel Corps in the FO", writes poor, mad, sad, demented Verity, unable to answer any of my points about what would happen if Iran really were attacked as "she" (I'm not convinced of that, by the way) advocates, or indeed about anything else.<BR/><BR/>Well, Verity, try this one: they don't come much more "Islam-loving" than those who backed the proto-Taliban, Alija Izetbegovic, the Kosovo "Liberation" Army, and the unleashing both of Wahhabism and of its Shi'te twin in Iraq, and who continue to back Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Chechnya, while calling for the Iraqification of Syria and the letting of out of such Iranian genies as the Shi'te Arabs, the Kurds, the Turkeman, the Baluchis, the Azeris, and Persians bent on revenge.<BR/><BR/>Of course, dhimmitude holds no terrors for your neocon pals, Verity. They look back to Moorish Spain, and they like what they see.<BR/><BR/>Do you actually know what any of these words mean, Verity?David Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06839882674758833524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-7136882244252633962007-04-02T15:49:00.000+01:002007-04-02T15:49:00.000+01:00Normal Norman - when I discussed how you had the i...Normal Norman - when I discussed how you had the impertinence to refer to L/S Turney as a "young lady", I asked if you would have referred to her male colleagues as "young men". That was a mistake. I meant to ask you if you would have referred to them as "the young gentlemen".<BR/><BR/>You wouldn't, of course, because something in the back of your mind would warn you of how patronising such a phrase is. And you referred to L/S Turney as "the young lady" because that is how you feel about women. Patronising. And vaguely resentful.<BR/><BR/>No one but a lout would refer to a 26-year old professional woman as "the young lady". That you did so is illustrative of your patronising attitude to women.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1523421980614445892007-04-02T15:20:00.000+01:002007-04-02T15:20:00.000+01:00"I honestly could not believe that a fellow human ..."I honestly could not believe that a fellow human being could wish for the annihilation of another country."<BR/><BR/><I>Awwwww. Bless!</I> (Believe it.)<BR/><BR/>"Presumably the sight of all those women and children lying dead in the streets would bring tears of joy to your eyes." <BR/><BR/>Why? You people on the moonbeam far left really don't have a sense of irony, do you? You try. You mimic what you think is cutting, pointed irony, but you just can't get it, can you? And you always over-egg the pudding.<BR/><BR/>I would probably feel sorry that children's lives had been cut short through no fault of their own and I would hope they didn't suffer. About the women, I think 'indifference' would about cover it. They're all part of the same set-up. Half the people protesting outside embassies, doing the one!-two!-three! thrusting of their right fists as they shout their slogans are women. Half the people who waded into Cartoon Rage with such vigour and hatred were women. So, no.<BR/><BR/>"I referred to Leading Seaman Turney, not Turner, as the "young lady" as I was unaware of her rank at the time. I now know her rank and refer to her accordingly. Happy?"<BR/><BR/>No. "Young lady" is how you refer to the girl who stamped the wrong date in your library book. As in "I think the young lady had forgotten to change the date stamp". Not how you refer to a sailor on active duty. Would you refer to any of the male sailors as "young men" or would you refer to them by their profession: sailors?<BR/><BR/>You're patronising, self-rightous and preachy, so at least you fit the stereotype.<BR/><BR/>"When captured, do as you're told for the time being. L/S Turney is a Service person who has been trained how to behave in such a situation and is presumably acting accordingly."<BR/><BR/>No shit, Sherlock! I criticised not L/S Turney but the vile Iranians for humiliating her with obscenity of the hijab. You're not supposed to humiliate prisoners of war. Please try to put your prejudices to one side and read what people actually write instead of setting up straw men to triumphantly pull down.<BR/><BR/>"At least she has not had to suffer the indignity of being hooded and manacled." GITMMMMOH!!!!!! Thank God you mentioned it! The suspense was killing me. Moral equivalency. Self-detonators and their handlers compared to a ship full of professional sailors working peacefully under the auspices of the UN. Makes sense to me.<BR/><BR/>I don't care how many years you served in the armed forces. I'll bet you were a pain in the neck with your little lectures and your moral equivalency, dearie.<BR/><BR/>I wish the enemies of Britain ill. Iran is our enemy. Ergo ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-4385120665642935042007-04-02T14:07:00.000+01:002007-04-02T14:07:00.000+01:00Verity.So I may assume from your hysterical diatri...Verity.<BR/><BR/>So I may assume from your hysterical diatribe that you have some disagreement with me?<BR/><BR/>With the kind permission of our host I will make a considered response to you on this matter.<BR/><BR/>My comments regarding the position of the craft WAS measured using a chart and dividers. If you do the same you will find that all positions indicated are nearer to the Iranian mainland than the Iraqi mainland. If fact, this very question is central to the current dispute. Please check the current news bulletins.<BR/><BR/>One would assume from your mocking comments that the general public should not have any "doubts" when given information by respective governments. In fact, I had doubts when Tony Blair stated that Saddam had WMDs with a 45 minute capability. I wonder if you had any doubts?<BR/><BR/>As it happens I was right on that occasion and think that I may well be right this time. If you can accept that without getting abusive of course.<BR/><BR/>I am sorry that I appear to have upset you with my description of your remarks as "tongue in cheek". <BR/>I honestly could not believe that a fellow human being could wish for the annihilation of another country. <BR/><BR/>Presumably the sight of all those women and children lying dead in the streets would bring tears of joy to your eyes. <BR/><BR/>It certainly reminded me of Mr. Ahmadinejad's comments regarding the removal of Israel. How alike you are.<BR/><BR/>I referred to Leading Seaman Turney, not Turner, as the "young lady" as I was unaware of her rank at the time. I now know her rank and refer to her accordingly. Happy?<BR/><BR/>I note that you, too, have doubts about L/S. Turney's wearing of the hijab. So you can have doubts but I can't. Like I said previously. When captured, do as you're told for the time being. L/S Turney is a Service person who has been trained how to behave in such a situation and is presumably acting accordingly. At least she has not had to suffer the indignity of being hooded and manacled.<BR/><BR/>Being seen with a piece of cloth over her head can hardly be described as being a "bint in the street". She is in their custody and is probably wearing the hijab because she was told to. It's not the worst thing that could have been inflicted on her after all. I believe that the captives have, to date, conducted themselves in a digified manner notwithstanding the 'humiliations' that they have endured. Their situation is probably preferable to the innocent inmates of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.<BR/><BR/>Having exhausted your rather weak argument you then go on to abuse me. Why? Please believe me, I have no wish to abuse you, Could it be that it just makes you feel better? <BR/><BR/>Bring it on if you must but your opinion falls flat on its face when you resort to such abuse.<BR/><BR/>You clearly indicate to me that I should have no opinion on anything if it conflicts with your rather ill-thought statements. Why not? I have served this country in uniform for many years, although now retired, and have as much entitlement as any other to my opinion and the freedom to express it. <BR/><BR/>That's exactly what L/S. Turney and her comrades are doing at this time. This is the same freedom of speech that allows you to verbally abuse me in this thread. In fact, they are currently captured as part of the greater scheme which has given you YOUR freedom to abuse people. Whilst I would not agree with your abusive comments I would defend to the death your right to make them. Subject, of course to to approval of our host.<BR/><BR/>Would you do the same for me?<BR/><BR/>I wish you well and look forward to another discourse with you at a later date.<BR/><BR/>I am afraid that I must reject you kind offer to bugger off. It's not really my cup of tea dearie.<BR/><BR/>Be well.<BR/><BR/>Peace and Love.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-71676797876326522892007-04-02T13:11:00.000+01:002007-04-02T13:11:00.000+01:00That shows remarkably poor recollection of history...That shows remarkably poor recollection of history, even for the Americans...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-78700277898120553322007-04-02T11:34:00.000+01:002007-04-02T11:34:00.000+01:00No doubt this posting will cause derision and I to...No doubt this posting will cause derision and I too have little time for the UN,but if,as is said,that the captured vessels were on patrol under UN auspices,then they should have worn the blue beret.It would have been far harder for the Iranians to parade them in those circumstances.As it is, we have the worst of both worlds.We do not seem to have been adequately prepared for this type of ambush or otherwise have robust rules of engagement because these are mandated UN duties but now things are badly wrong they are simply members of the British military.Surely this sort of incident must have been foreseen and ought not to have been allowed to happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-58898146667473879142007-04-02T11:13:00.000+01:002007-04-02T11:13:00.000+01:00Voyager"Did we invade Iraq? Is that what closet pe...Voyager<BR/>"Did we invade Iraq? Is that what closet peaceniks do?<BR/><BR/>It is exactly what peaceniks do.<BR/><BR/>Sensible people CONTROL the country they have invaded, these peaceniks never did"<BR/><BR/>No peacniks don't invade countries. The people who do this are incompetent imperialists, the worst of both worlds. People who go around saying we "punch above our weight", not in our own interests but in the USA's & get surprised when we get the odd black eye.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-29660843496664418092007-04-02T10:03:00.000+01:002007-04-02T10:03:00.000+01:00Many posters think diplomacy will solve this hosta...Many posters think diplomacy will solve this hostage-taking crisis perpetrated by Iran. I am reminded of the notice pinned up in President Putin's Press Office. It says, <I>"Diplomacy is the ability to tell a person to go to hell in such a way that he looks forward to the journey."</I><BR/><BR/>Others held some hope in the EU. However, (surprise, surprise)the EU refused to support export sanctions against Iran. All Blair's claptrap about restoring democracy to Iraq, pales to insignificance when one considers that he and his Government have sacrificed Britain's democracy and hard-won freedoms, Parliamentary Sovereignty, Criminal Justice system and a whole host of British traditions and values on the altar of the unelected, unaccountable EU bureaucrats in Brussels.<BR/><BR/>As this refusal shows, the EU will give the UK the same support the rope gives the hanging man. We'd be BETTER OFF OUT of the EU.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-28854035379520251022007-04-02T09:03:00.000+01:002007-04-02T09:03:00.000+01:00Can I just add the comment that the RN, at least i...Can I just add the comment that the RN, at least in the guise of the Cornwall's captain, seems to have lost all touch with Nelson's spirit. Getting permission from Whitehall to engage an enemy on the high seas?!!? Showing no concern for his sailors?!!? He should be court-martialled, and preferably keel-hauled, if possible, underneath Victory. If they could possibly arraign & condemn Blair & all his impotent cohorts to the same fate, that would be even better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-13425516366803400752007-04-02T09:00:00.000+01:002007-04-02T09:00:00.000+01:00A Reformation would be good.Farcical. It is imposs...<I>A Reformation would be good.</I><BR/><BR/>Farcical. It is imposssible. What was The Reformation in Europe ? It was the success after failures of Jan Hus and other reformers to wrest control away from Rome.<BR/><BR/>The French Kings had fought Rome for 4 centuries to control the flow of taxes to Rome, but it was Saxony and Northern German principalities which resisted paying taxes to the Bishop of Mainz for transference to Rome.<BR/><BR/>Martin Luther attacked the Secular Power of The Church and its money-making schemes such as holy relics and Indulgences designed to enrich the Roman Catholic Imperial HQ in Rome<BR/><BR/>What do you propose Muslims learn from this ? To stop visiting Mecca ?<BR/><BR/>It is a completely different religion from Roman Catholicism - it has NO church hierarchy, it is cellular and about as easy to coordinate as all those Free Baptist and Free Presbyterian Churches that sprout up in US towns and TV stations.<BR/><BR/>There is only one immutable Koran, it cannot be rewritten or textually analysed, nor written with The Great She or debased as with The Bible.<BR/><BR/>The whole discussion about "Reformation" suggests people who have no understanding of what The Reformation was and the violence of the Peasants' Revolt. It unleashed violence on a scale that makes Muslim terrorism look like a bar fight.<BR/><BR/>The Reformation went back to Judaism in looking at its structures - should Islam do the same and rewrite The Torah ?<BR/><BR/>Islam goes in waves of expansion and contraction, Napoleon woke it up when he invaded Egypt. It is OIL that has revived it since 1973 and bankers who love OIL MONEY.<BR/><BR/>In the old days industrialists looked to oil, now business is footloose and just relocates so the old national identities are shrivelling in the West as China becomes the industrial quarter for the US and Europe who just play bankers in big coastal citiesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-88861998866438891922007-04-02T03:35:00.000+01:002007-04-02T03:35:00.000+01:00Normal Norman writes: "I have my doubts as to the ...Normal Norman writes: "I have my doubts as to the actual geographical position of their capture and believe that they may well have been out of bounds."<BR/><BR/><I>WOWWWWWWW!!!</I> Was that just intuitive or is there some evidence the rest of us haven't seen? As in satellite from the Americans, the Aussies, the Indians, the British, the Chinese? Oh, do tell!<BR/><BR/>You "have your <I>DOUBTS</I>?" Does the military establishment of Great Britain, the United States and the Commonwealth, with all their expertise, know of these doubts? Or are you offering fresh evidence? Do you have some way of contacting them to let them know of your doubts?<BR/><BR/>You write, of me, "Whilst I appreciate that much of your posting is 'tongue in cheek' I don't think that the wearing of the hijab by the young lady is a large price to pay for 'diplomatic' purposes."<BR/><BR/>Don't "appreciate" that anything I post is "tongue in cheek" because you don't know me and are therefore not in a position to make your "appreciations". <BR/><BR/>You are incorrect. I don't think it's "a small price to pay". I think it's unconscionable. <BR/><BR/>I doubt, although obviously I don't know, that Turner, who is enduring this, thinks its a small price to pay, asshole. How would you know the humiliation she has gone through, a professional of nine years, reduced to a being a bint in the marketplace? How <I>dare</I> you?<BR/><BR/>And how dare you, an established nonentity, refer to this professional of nine years' training and standing as "the young lady", you condescending piece of chopped up nonenity?<BR/><BR/>"I am a great believer in the concept of aggression being the absolutely last resort. The current situation requires careful and considered diplomacy in order to avoid a world wide conflagration."<BR/><BR/>Whoaaaah! You missed your calling! PUNDIT TO THE ARMED FORCES WORLDWIDE! <BR/><BR/>I'm a great believer that if you are strong enough, and make it clear that you are very strong, there will be no aggression.<BR/><BR/>What a prat you are, pretending to a considered point of view, as though you were in the FO or had any say about anything - pretending to take a measured stance. How pathetic. <BR/><BR/>You give Jane's Fighting Keyboards a bad name.<BR/><BR/>Bugger off.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-4981479582506479832007-04-02T02:50:00.000+01:002007-04-02T02:50:00.000+01:00Verity.The 'Rapture crowd' that I refer to are the...Verity.<BR/><BR/>The 'Rapture crowd' that I refer to are the American group that eagerly await Armageddon, the end of the world and the second coming of Christ. Of course if you are not a member then I am afraid that, according to them, there is no hope for you, nor for me for that matter.<BR/><BR/>I really must take issue with your description of me as Tony Blair "Man". That is so far from the truth.<BR/><BR/>I am a great believer in the concept of aggression being the absolutely last resort. The current situation requires careful and considered diplomacy in order to avoid a world wide conflagration.<BR/><BR/>There is more to the capture of the fifteen British sailors and marines, I believe, than meets the eye. I have my doubts as to the actual geographical position of their capture and believe that they may well have been out of bounds. The position of their capture was probably nearer to the Iranian mainland than the Iraqi mainland which could legitimately be perceived by Iran as being an incursion into their 'territory'. Let's wait and see.<BR/><BR/>I appreciate that this may sound weak to you but I can assure you that if they were to invade us I would be among the first to volunteer in defence of the Realm. I could still take an eye out at 300 metres.<BR/><BR/>Whilst I appreciate that much of your posting is 'tongue in cheek' I don't think that the wearing of the hijab by the young lady is a large price to pay for 'diplomatic' purposes. Remember, when you are captured, best do as you are told for the time being. I do not believe that they have been abused by the Iranians and they all appear to be in good spirits, notwithstanding their 'confessions'.<BR/><BR/>Let diplomacy take its course and keep in mind that we are not dealing with a defenceless nation or one that is unused to warfare.<BR/><BR/>Please also bear in mind the current Israeli proposals for another peace in Gaza and the West Bank. Surely an attack by us or the USA would precipitate an attack on Israel which, in its turn, would respond with a counter attack and we'd all go to Hell in a hand cart, you included.<BR/><BR/>Have a good day.<BR/><BR/>Peace and Love.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-37587946799869922422007-04-02T02:15:00.000+01:002007-04-02T02:15:00.000+01:00The armchair generals are out in force I see. 1) T...The armchair generals are out in force I see. <BR/><BR/>1) The Royal Navy is currenly in the gulf under a UN mandate at the request of the Iraqi government to protect Iraqi oil terminals. If we suddenly started launching missiles at Iran I imagine they'd attack both, with their navy and air force, probably destroying Iraqi infastructure and sinking British ships.<BR/><BR/>2) Iran has an air force, the UK does not have foreign bases surrounding Iran, the USA does. Neither the democrat controlled Congress/Senate or the Arabs want war with Iran. Launching an air war using what 4th generation Harriers we can muster from a Naval platform against Iran would be a disaster. I reckon we'd lose whatever Navy we had out there and a shed load of planes.<BR/><BR/>3) If we attacked Iran they would probably retaliate against UK forces in Iraq on the ground - killing UK troops and Iraqis.<BR/><BR/>Would this scenario make you all feel proud to be British?<BR/><BR/>4) Oil prices would skyrocket meaning all your mortgage interest rates would rise. This would make me very happy because I'm priced out. You guys on the other hand would start bitching!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-51411785823193196092007-04-02T01:30:00.000+01:002007-04-02T01:30:00.000+01:00Normal Norman - I sincerely haven't a clue what a ...Normal Norman - I sincerely haven't a clue what a 'rapture crowd' is, but you seem to be saying we shouldn't annoy the Iranians because they have captured British military personnel and may have more unpleasantries up their flapping sleeves.<BR/><BR/>In other words, you have an interest in negotiating from weakness. <BR/><BR/>You are a perfect example of TonyBlair"Man". Accept assaults by people far weaker than you, apologise, and grovel for titbits.<BR/><BR/>Let us get our military personnel, who we have shamefully failed to protect - even up to allowing a competent, professional woman from an advanced society wear a filthy rag called a hijab. <BR/><BR/>Let's see Amiinjihad paraded naked with a tiny hijab over his own 'head'. That would at least would give us all a laugh. Fair does!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-87092603445446362132007-04-02T01:11:00.000+01:002007-04-02T01:11:00.000+01:00Verity,I suggest that we all stop and think of the...Verity,I suggest that we all stop and think of the global consequences of your proposal.<BR/><BR/>Please check my previous posting wherein I state that there is doubt as to the position of the Cornwall and its small craft.<BR/><BR/>Your proposal that "Iran must go" seems quite bizarre to me. Go where? Are you suggesting the destruction of Iran?<BR/><BR/>You suggest that their refinery be destroyed. How? By what means?<BR/><BR/>They already control the Gulf with their Sunburn missiles, against which UK and USA shipping has no credible defence.<BR/><BR/>Further, whilst I doubt that Iran is currently holding nuclear missiles they certainly have more than enough 'dirty' nuclear material complete with delivery systems with which much mischief can be caused.<BR/><BR/>Are you a nihilist or maybe one of the Rapture crowd?<BR/><BR/>Peace and Love.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-80617375848078379122007-04-02T00:45:00.000+01:002007-04-02T00:45:00.000+01:00Normal Norman - So what do you suggest? It should...Normal Norman - So what do you suggest? It should be lethal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-32962776694171910182007-04-02T00:40:00.000+01:002007-04-02T00:40:00.000+01:00Please remember Verity, The Iranians are not exact...Please remember Verity, The Iranians are not exactly defenceless.<BR/><BR/>Google Sunburn Missile and think again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-75156693394226275722007-04-02T00:36:00.000+01:002007-04-02T00:36:00.000+01:00David Lindsay notes, in his second prolix post: "O...David Lindsay notes, in his second prolix post: "Oh, and before anyone suggests that I have contradicted myself by calling Iran an emerging democracy...".<BR/><BR/>No one will suggest such, David Lindsay, because no one reads your posts.<BR/><BR/>The rest of us cut to the chase. Iran must go.<BR/><BR/>I do agree that we need our military home first and assume that there are people working on this. Although given the febrile Tony Blair and the islam-loving Camel Corps in the FO, I am not confident. OTOH, I think the Camel Corps seem to be predisposed to Arabs, so we may be OK here.<BR/><BR/>But after we have our service personnel home safely and reunited with their families, the end to Iran's petroleum refinery is very much a 'go'. <BR/><BR/>If we have to pay more for gasoline for a while, so bloody what? It is our armed services, for God's sake!<BR/><BR/>A connected chancellor - i.e., not one who picks his nose on the floor of Parliament while under scrutiny of cameras he knows are there but does it anyway because he thinks it doesn't count - leading observers to believe the chancellor is a wee bit wanting - but a real chancellor - a <I>British</I> Chancellor - would have enough slack in our exchequer to accommodate a temporary surge in oil prices.<BR/><BR/>Take out their prized refinery and blockade the borders. When they're on their knees, we tell them the terms.<BR/><BR/>Actually, no .... when they're on their knees, we kick their teeth out. This they can understand.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-74470899833055882007-04-01T23:15:00.000+01:002007-04-01T23:15:00.000+01:00Oh, and before anyone suggests that I have contrad...Oh, and before anyone suggests that I have contradicted myself by calling Iran an emerging democracy while saying that liberal democracy depends on Christianity, these are early days.<BR/><BR/>Japan, to cite the obvious example, will no doubt remain a democracy for many, many years yet. And Iran is starting several decades later than Japan did. But sooner or later, liberal democracy can only survive by reference to its roots in the Biblical-Classical synthesis that is Christianity.<BR/><BR/>An America or wannabe-America which instead allows herself to be shaped by the disciples of Max Shachtman, Leo Strauss or Ayn Rand will come to have at least as much trouble on this score as Japan or Iran. Even more so, in fact, if that alternative system (let's call it, oh, "neoconservatism") has, however bizarrely and ridiculously, been declared to be Christianity for popular consumption, making it far more difficult to subject to a popularly acceptable Biblical-Classical critique.David Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06839882674758833524noreply@blogger.com