RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII

RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:25:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Britain as usual didn't because it is in the personal interests of Britain's politicians to be plastic Americans. Relax Meat, we like Belguim and France......it's just we like our own space. No hard feelings, pal. The problem with Britain NG, is that it doesn't know what it wants. It doesn't want to be a part of the EU but it hasn't got the guts not to be part of the EU so it just tries to fuck up everything it doesn't like and its British workers that lose out in the end because the British government always denies them the protections workers from other countries get. It's natural instinct is to go along with America but can't face being just another state to be ignored. With the pound being squeezed between the dollar and the Euro, maybe Britain might have to choose sooner or later and my guess would be it would choose the Euro but only grudgingly and with a tantrum as usual.

Politesub53 -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:25:33 AM)
So France didnt have financial interests for not invading Iraq then meat ? And Blair didnt want the missiles based here ? Correct me if I am wrong.

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:29:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 So France didnt have financial interests for not invading Iraq then meat ? And Blair didnt want the missiles based here ? Correct me if I am wrong. Most western countries had economic interests in Iraq. If France tried to enter the war in Iraq, there would have been riots in Paris. The French were told the truth, that there was no credible evidence Saddam had WMDs and were they wrong? Of course Blair wanted missiles in Poland, he is a plastic American and Britain is right over on the west of Europe so it doesn't really effect Britain.

NorthernGent -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:32:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver there would have been riots in Paris Just another day in Paris, then.

slvemike4u -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:52:44 AM)
Good to see meat is keeping up with his "fair and balenced"world view.

Politesub53 -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 12:02:33 PM)
Meat, you said the UK didnt want the missiles in Poland. Not only was Blair happy to have them in the EU, Downing Street held talks to have them here. Now I have pointed out the truth to you, your tactic is to call Blair names. Hell, i call him names too, but at least i get my facts straight.

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 12:07:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Meat, you said the UK didnt want the missiles in Poland. Not only was Blair happy to have them in the EU, Downing Street held talks to have them here. Now I have pointed out the truth to you, your tactic is to call Blair names. Hell, i call him names too, but at least i get my facts straight. Britain as a member of NATO didn't want missiles in Poland, though I think the NATO diplomatic speak was didn't need missiles in Poland. That was why the US decided to place them there unilaterally and not as part of NATO. It was that that pissed off the Germans for destabilizing eastern Europe on its borders. Blair would have bent over and spread his buttocks seven days a week for America. He knew his lecture tour would make it worth it for him after he had left office. In fact I'm surprised he didn't become an American citizen once he left office because he seemed happier following American policy than any policy designed for the interests of Britain.

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 12:09:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver there would have been riots in Paris Just another day in Paris, then. Yeah, Brits go for a picnic for the day in London and then say bugger it when the government refusies to take notice.

NorthernGent -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 2:11:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver In fact I'm surprised he didn't become an American citizen once he left office because he seemed happier following American policy than any policy designed for the interests of Britain. Tony Blair was a liberal interventionist. He really believed we should help others in the world that don't have our opportunities. He, and the British Government, were absolutely gob-smacked at the ruthlessness of the Americans in Iraq. Blair seriously misunderstood Bush's regime; he thought it would be similar to Clinton's. It was Blair who convinced Clinton to get involved in the Balkans - not the other way 'round.

Politesub53 -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 3:32:54 PM)
Indeed NG, just as it was Major who instigated the first no fly zones in Iraq. Just as it was Thatcher who told Bush senior not to wobble.

slvemike4u -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 3:43:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Indeed NG, just as it was Major who instigated the first no fly zones in Iraq. Just as it was Thatcher who told Bush senior not to wobble. Polite ,might I ask just what the fuck you are doing.....Meat has allready told us Britain is little more than America's lap dog,why are you confusing matters?

Politesub53 -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 3:50:49 PM)
Mike, please forgive me. [;)]

slvemike4u -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 3:52:19 PM)
This time polite sub,please don't let it happen again!

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 10:38:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver In fact I'm surprised he didn't become an American citizen once he left office because he seemed happier following American policy than any policy designed for the interests of Britain. Tony Blair was a liberal interventionist. He really believed we should help others in the world that don't have our opportunities. He, and the British Government, were absolutely gob-smacked at the ruthlessness of the Americans in Iraq. Blair seriously misunderstood Bush's regime; he thought it would be similar to Clinton's. It was Blair who convinced Clinton to get involved in the Balkans - not the other way 'round. I fully understand Blair's naive interventionism, that is why he should have become an American. He often talked about liberal imperialism and said he was a believer in it. 'Imperialism' was his word.

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 10:41:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Indeed NG, just as it was Major who instigated the first no fly zones in Iraq. Just as it was Thatcher who told Bush senior not to wobble. The two aren't the same. Major was trying to aliviate the dire consequences of the first action, what he was doing was not an extension of Thatcher's policy. Though no doubt you consider saving one dictatorship from another dictatorship as progress, when we all really know it was about access to oil by the west. And there is more than enough evidence to suggest the US had given Saddam a nod and a wink about his taking Kuwait. One of the reasons it has been claimed, the US didn't want Saddam tried in an international court on war crimes, many American officials would have been implimented in his case. Top of the list, Rumsfeld. The US wanted an Iraqi court to try Saddam and to hang him to save US embarrassment at their previous support for his regime.

NorthernGent -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/9/2008 11:28:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver In fact I'm surprised he didn't become an American citizen once he left office because he seemed happier following American policy than any policy designed for the interests of Britain. Tony Blair was a liberal interventionist. He really believed we should help others in the world that don't have our opportunities. He, and the British Government, were absolutely gob-smacked at the ruthlessness of the Americans in Iraq. Blair seriously misunderstood Bush's regime; he thought it would be similar to Clinton's. It was Blair who convinced Clinton to get involved in the Balkans - not the other way 'round. I fully understand Blair's naive interventionism, that is why he should have become an American. He often talked about liberal imperialism and said he was a believer in it. 'Imperialism' was his word. You have to be joking? Are you seriously suggesting Britain doesn't have a history of interventionism in other countries' affairs? Following your logic, we are, and have always been, even before the United States came into existence, American.

JustDarkness -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/10/2008 12:45:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 So France didnt have financial interests for not invading Iraq then meat ? And Blair didnt want the missiles based here ? Correct me if I am wrong. Most western countries had economic interests in Iraq. If France tried to enter the war in Iraq, there would have been riots in Paris. The French were told the truth, that there was no credible evidence Saddam had WMDs and were they wrong? Of course Blair wanted missiles in Poland, he is a plastic American and Britain is right over on the west of Europe so it doesn't really effect Britain. An other reason for France was ....it wanted to be seen as a World Power again. Showing military force around the globe is a start..they thought. (that was here in the news papers right then)

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/10/2008 3:36:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver In fact I'm surprised he didn't become an American citizen once he left office because he seemed happier following American policy than any policy designed for the interests of Britain. Tony Blair was a liberal interventionist. He really believed we should help others in the world that don't have our opportunities. He, and the British Government, were absolutely gob-smacked at the ruthlessness of the Americans in Iraq. Blair seriously misunderstood Bush's regime; he thought it would be similar to Clinton's. It was Blair who convinced Clinton to get involved in the Balkans - not the other way 'round. I fully understand Blair's naive interventionism, that is why he should have become an American. He often talked about liberal imperialism and said he was a believer in it. 'Imperialism' was his word. You have to be joking? Are you seriously suggesting Britain doesn't have a history of interventionism in other countries' affairs? Following your logic, we are, and have always been, even before the United States came into existence, American. Did I say that? No I didn't, it just suited you to say I did. I said Blair, believed in and advocated 'Liberal imperialism'. He is the only Prime Minister since the war that has advocated imperial policies as far as I'm aware.

meatcleaver -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/10/2008 3:40:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JustDarkness quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 So France didnt have financial interests for not invading Iraq then meat ? And Blair didnt want the missiles based here ? Correct me if I am wrong. Most western countries had economic interests in Iraq. If France tried to enter the war in Iraq, there would have been riots in Paris. The French were told the truth, that there was no credible evidence Saddam had WMDs and were they wrong? Of course Blair wanted missiles in Poland, he is a plastic American and Britain is right over on the west of Europe so it doesn't really effect Britain. An other reason for France was ....it wanted to be seen as a World Power again. Showing military force around the globe is a start..they thought. (that was here in the news papers right then) If you really believe that I would learn some French and find out the truth about what was said in France about Iraq and I wouldn't rely on the British papers either. The British Ambassador in France wrote in his book that Chirac told Blair that the invasion of Iraq would cause a civil war and the west would be bogged down for years. Chirac also said in public, no one has produced any credible evidence that Saddam had WMDs. That was read by commentators to mean (in diplomatic speak) he believed the US had other reasons for the invasion other than WMDs.

RealityLicks -> RE: Japan not the aggressor in WWII (11/10/2008 4:26:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver I said Blair, believed in and advocated 'Liberal imperialism'. He is the only Prime Minister since the war that has advocated imperial policies as far as I'm aware. Suez?

Page: << < prev 9 10 11 [12] 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125