Reply to: Iraq - The End game

[zathras]

Like YOU would know!!

No he was correct. It was nonsense.

We should never have gone in. the evidence used was woeful and propped up by lies and hafl-truths. We have turned Iraq into a cause celebre for every extreme nutter out there.

Then we compounded the problems by creating a large disenfranchised group in Iraq and not having a proper plan on how to run the country afterwards. A vacuum was created which has been filled by the so called insurgents.

Having bombed the country virtually into destruction we have a moral duty to stay and deal with the problems our actions have caused.

And to compound that failure we also left the job half done in Afghanistan; meaning that having overthrown the Taliban they are busy fighting the coalition (did we learn nothing from the Russian failure and the UK's own failure in that country). Fuirther it is producing far more heroin now than under the Taliban, thus leading to social problems here as heroin becomes cheaper.

[shaunbhoy]

Because it is free market - if it not equitable enough for you then don't sell at offered price.

No alexei. Do try and keep up. sasguru suggested that in future the countries of the world will have to come to an equitable agreement over sharing resources. My point was "Why"? What is in the national interests of those who have the resources (dwindling ones I might add!) to equitably share them with those who don't? Assuming of course that we expect all sovereign governments to act in their own best interest.

By the way, gotta go now............be back tomorrow to continue the fun!!

C Ya

[shaunbhoy]

So what you're saying is that we should have used our knowledge of Mein Kampf to formulate a police of appeasement with Hitler in the expectation that he would ultimately invade Russia, fight himself to a standstill, and then we could clean up?

I suggest you keep your day job. And perhaps you could hire some of our current policy makers.

No, yet again you pick up the strands of reasoned logic and contort them into the ball of spaghetti that defines yours. What I am saying is that we should have been able to see the writing on the wall and prepare for conflict a bit more expeditiously than we did. We should also have kept our cards a bit closer to our chests than we did with good old Neville Chamberlain, and given the job of PM to Winston a lot sooner.

[sasguru]

You are really good at the irony thing!

Prosperous democratic countries of the world agreeing an equitable share of resources. Sounds like a title for a Borat movie.

As atw says. Free market. We buy oil that we need, they build useless buildings with gold taps. Everone's happy

[AtW]

Since when was the free market ever "equitable" though?

Because it is free market - if it not equitable enough for you then don't sell at offered price.

[sasguru]

They formed the basis of his, which I think you will agree had a bearing upon what ours ended up being. In light of the fact that he spent a number of years in the build-up to the war embarking upon realising many of them, we ought to have at least factored some of them into our thoughts. Don't you?

So what you're saying is that we should have used our knowledge of Mein Kampf to formulate a police of appeasement with Hitler in the expectation that he would ultimately invade Russia, fight himself to a standstill, and then we could clean up?

I suggest you keep your day job. And perhaps you could hire some of our current policy makers.

[shaunbhoy]

Called free market - the West is buying Iranian oil quiet happily, and it was buying oil and gas from USSR at the peak of cold war.

Since when was the free market ever "equitable" though?

[Logie]

You are really good at the irony thing!

Prosperous democratic countries of the world agreeing an equitable share of resources. Sounds like a title for a Borat movie.

I see your point. But that is an entirely different issue. In the future the countries of the world will have to come to sort of agreement about the equitable sharing of resources. That process will probably easier if they are reasonably prosperous and democratic.

[AtW]

Why might that be then sasguru?

Called free market - the West is buying Iranian oil quiet happily, and it was buying oil and gas from USSR at the peak of cold war.

[shaunbhoy]

In the future the countries of the world will have to come to sort of agreement about the equitable sharing of resources.

Why might that be then sasguru?

[sasguru]

Couple of clues for you:

1. In the real world, with limited resources
2. prosperous, democratic and peaceful world

I see your point. But that is an entirely different issue. In the future the countries of the world will have to come to sort of agreement about the equitable sharing of resources. That process will probably easier if they are reasonably prosperous and democratic.

[AtW]

You will get all you deserve and more shaun, just be patient...

[shaunbhoy]

I reckon I ought to be in line for some sort of reward for being the first on here to find a use for AtW!!

[AtW]

If you don't believe me, ask AtW how fantastic the Russkies were.

Numerical superiority and willingness of leaders to sacrifice ridiculous number of people in order to stay in power, that's what won the war for USSR. Some of the weapons were better actually, and it probably helped reduce casualty ratio somewhat.

[shaunbhoy]

So you're saying the rantings of Mein Kampf written by Hitler as a young man should have formed the basis of our foreign policy?

They formed the basis of his, which I think you will agree had a bearing upon what ours ended up being. In light of the fact that he spent a number of years in the build-up to the war embarking upon realising many of them, we ought to have at least factored some of them into our thoughts. Don't you?