Time please gentlemen

The people of Tunisia and Egypt have revolted and the people of Bahrain are engaged in a struggle against their regime as I write. The imperial governments of the USA and the UK have sponsored and supported all three dictators of the aforesaid nations throughout their time in power.

In arguably the most oppressive regimes in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia (US & UK’s bestest buddy) there is real tension on the streets. If it does Kick-off in Saudi Arabia, should we, ‘Stand shoulder to shoulder’ with the US or finally recognise that the sun has set on our empire?

The Saudis are the worlds biggest human rights offenders, bigger than Afghanistan ever were under the Taliban. The Saudis have produced more terrorists, than Iraq/Afghanistan combined a thousand fold. Why are we not in there helping the people to overthrow these despicable regimes? (Rhetorical BTW)

oh!!!! thought this was about a pub closing ::)

not interested in what they do....yeah the days of fiddling about internationally and empire are gone...leave it to the portuguese or belgiums to get involved for a change ;D

You know, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn eventually that the CIA have been behind all the recent unrest in North Africa and the Middle East, the septics are always banging on about "democracy" so maybe they figured that encouraging civil unrest and the removal of dictators and totalitarian regimes via the back door, it's in their interests if it can spread as far as Iran and unseat that nutcase Ahmadinejad before the Israelis take matters into their own hands and go in unilaterally to neutralise the nuclear threat, thereby de-stabilising the entire region and initiating a bloodbath... :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scotty

You know, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn eventually that the CIA have been behind all the recent unrest in North Africa and the Middle East, the septics are always banging on about "democracy" so maybe they figured that encouraging civil unrest and the removal of dictators and totalitarian regimes via the back door, it's in their interests if it can spread as far as Iran and unseat that nutcase Ahmadinejad before the Israelis take matters into their own hands and go in unilaterally to neutralise the nuclear threat, thereby de-stabilising the entire region and initiating a bloodbath... :(

---

We have been chatting about this at work and with the exception of the CIA part causing it all we came to the conclusion that Iran is a good end goal of all this. The problem been at the moment is that if Iran get poked too hard with a stick they would not think twice about taking out someone on the way down, Israel been the one in question.

If that happened, the Israelis would retaliate in a way not seen in a long time. This whole situation is very problematic and unfortunately I dont think it will take much at all for it to go off in a big way with the rest of us HAVING to get involved.

well we could do without that

This revolution fever is spreading quicker than a bush fire - Libya now. I suspect we have not seen an end to it all yet.

Yet we're still being shafted with £1.30 at the pumps!

Sad that many see destablisation in the middle east as nothing more than a pain in our pockets when there are 100's of people being hurt in protests and riots and being fired upon by their own countrymen , but as long as its not hitting us too badly at the fuel pump who gives a sh1t?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BladeTriple

Sad that many see destablisation in the middle east as nothing more than a pain in our pockets when there are 100's of people being hurt in protests and riots and being fired upon by their own countrymen , but as long as its not hitting us too badly at the fuel pump who gives a sh1t?

---

I agree BT. I am not being antagonistic however, merely expressing my honest opinion that the US and UK adnins are more concerned about oil supplies in the Middle East than they are about human rights abuse. If that were not to be the case we would have intervened in Zimbabwe along time ago and saved thousands from dying at the hands of Robert Mugabe. Our government appears to be selective when it comes to protecting the citizens of oppressive regimes.

Famous quote from Henry Kissinger: America has no friends, only interests.

We are no different.

Was just reading that two Iranian warships have sailed out of the Suez and entered the Eastern Med, allegedly, on their way to Syria. Israel is on high alert. Don't look too good.

I might actually start watching the news if it's getting serious. I don't normally bother as it's mostly just propaganda and one sided opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nooj

I might actually start watching the news if it's getting serious. I don't normally bother as it's mostly just propaganda and one sided opinions.

---

I clicked on an icon on my Yahoo home page. The main news was mostly dedicated to the troubles in Libya. It's all very worrying with things so unstable at the moment. I just hope the Israelis don't get drawn into the situation. Americans would most certainly become involved then.

Those two Iranian ships are more than a little bit worrying, they stray just a metre into Israeli waters and they can kiss their asses goodbye!

It could be nothing more than an attempt to provoke the Israelis into action, then justifying a military response of their own and hopefully (from the Iranian perspective) drawing widespread condemnation from the rest of the Arab world and unifying them against Israel.
I'd imagine that the remainder of the Arab nations are more concerned with their own internal happenings at the moment and see the Iranian regime as a liability so they wouldn't back them in initiating conflict with Israel

I agree with you Scotty, but I think Syria would probably back Iran in the event of any conflict with Israel. It's all a bit messy at the moment.

I see the Greeks have been making a day of it as well. Has something got into the water at that end of the Med??

Gaddafi, fly in the ointment to the West, but a good topic of conversation at the Whitehouse and Downing Street dinner parties:

"Can't say too much old chap, but the old SAS have things in hand." "Well I hope so, the guy's a nutter, he's indoctrinating his own people, 80 per cent are employed by his regime and the other 25 per cent are Christians." “See what I can do old chap, pull a few strings to cut a few strings if you get my drift, but this chap is not your normal puppet if you know what I mean old chap”

Last night saw ten of the fifteen members of the UN Security Council vote in favour of the resolution to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya. As UK forces are preparing to help enforce the no-fly zone, I make no apologies for bringing this thread to the fore.

I agree with Tony Benn, who reacted to the UN decision by saying, "The question is, is it right for us to start a new war, we've got the Afghan war, to start a war in Libya, because the language used covers up what it's really about, it's an attempt to get rid of Gaddafi.
"Without holding any cards for Gaddafi, and I'm not supporting him, the fact is that the revolution in Libya has not led to the victory that it did in Tunisia and Egypt, and therefore we would be entering into a civil war.
"And the truth is you're going into a war without clear objectives, although everybody knows what the British objectives and American objectives are.
"I think this is going to damage the popular movement in the Middle East by allowing it to be presented as a western intervention."

Do we have the military resources to engage in another war?
Why are the leaders of the other EU member states so slow out of the ‘starting blocks’ in committing forces?

Finally, many in the Arab world will present this as a western intervention. As in all wars, the imminent conflict in Libya will lead to innocent casualties, which could unite the Libyan people behind Gaddafi. I very much hope I am wrong.

While I agree that the international community should stand together and stop leaders killing their own people who protest against their rule, I have to say we are very selective about which countries we decide to intervene with.

I was in favour of removing Saddam, and I watched as their pulled his statue down and people swarmed it, slapping it with their footwear, and for me that was why we should have gone in. My problem with that war is that it wasn't sanctioned by international agreement, the information that was given to us at the time was 'sexed' up for no other reason to gain support, and at the end of the day we didn't go in to help the people, we went in because of the oil.

We sold Gaddafi the very weapons he is using to slaughter his own people, and cameron even took a load of arms dealers to the middle east on his 'mission of peace and unity', the hypocracy in our foreign policy is shameful.

The main reason the west will get involved in Libya they will claim is to stop human rights attrocities, but I think we all know that the government wants to go in because of the oil.

If we are to take the stance that we will only intervene when there is human rights violations, then why are we also not talking about invading the other countries that are slaughtering and oppressing their people by force?

VOTE HUNAR!!

One of the worst tyrants for oppression and civil rights violations is Mugabe, but he's safe because he has no oil for the septics to covet... >:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scotty

One of the worst tyrants for oppression and civil rights violations is Mugabe, but he's safe because he has no oil for the septics to covet... >:(

---

Doesn't even come close to what happened in Rowanda. 800,000 people murdered in 3 months. Even a wanker like Mugabe would struggle to pull that off. I read 'Shake hands with the devil' by General Romeo Dallaire a few years ago. I couldn't decide what was worse, the sickening acts that some people were capable of or the fact that our government sat back and watched it happen. If only they had oil like Iraq or diamonds like Sierra Leone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scotty

One of the worst tyrants for oppression and civil rights violations is Mugabe, but he's safe because he has no oil for the septics to covet... >:(

---

Agreed! >:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon_W

[quote author=Scotty link=1298165196/22#22 date=1300451071]One of the worst tyrants for oppression and civil rights violations is Mugabe, but he's safe because he has no oil for the septics to covet... >:(

---

Agreed! >:([/quote]

+1 here >:(

And of course Nelson Mandela is a hero too, let not forget why he got locked up in the first plase...



8 January 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, coinciding with the 70th anniversary of the formation of the ANC, the Church Street bombing on 20 May 1983, killing 19, and the 14 June 1986 car-bombing of Magoo's Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured.


Chris

Er, Mandela was in prison from 1962 to 1990 so he couldn't really be guilty of the crimes you've quoted there could he? ::)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisJo

And of course Nelson Mandela is a hero too, let not forget why he got locked up in the first plase...



8 January 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, coinciding with the 70th anniversary of the formation of the ANC, the Church Street bombing on 20 May 1983, killing 19, and the 14 June 1986 car-bombing of Magoo's Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured.


Chris

---

Not sure you're correct with that one Chrispy

But hey...right on though eh....dude...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisJo

And of course Nelson Mandela is a hero too, let not forget why he got locked up in the first plase...



8 January 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, coinciding with the 70th anniversary of the formation of the ANC, the Church Street bombing on 20 May 1983, killing 19, and the 14 June 1986 car-bombing of Magoo's Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured.


Chris

---

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

The great man was certainly a freedom fighter.

On a slight tangent, this is a shame

Brian Haw Evicted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kev

On a slight tangent, this is a shame

Brian Haw Evicted

---

"A penny for the Guy" £20 for Brian? "The Mother of all democracies?" Boris, we are a laughing stock.