Come on Tony.....
- Started
- Last post
- 35 Responses
- xflixi
more than 70% of the british citizens are against the war.
tony,
leave the US alone.
join EUROPE now.
come to daddy.we krauts and baguettes need you to build the huge atlantic wall.
- Vinney20
Si/Ya/Oi/Yes/ I agree. Come on Tone you puppet.
- dstlb0
I'm with Europe, they have better food.
- Dita0
Tony = Wank
Europe = +
- quik0
same deal with john howard here in australia, he's a snivelling little weasle and public opinion of sending troops to aid fucking george is fucking low.
I wish we had leaders like france and germany who said NO to sending troops. - fuck you george.
- dstlb0
Fuck Tony. Used to think he was ok but fast losing any respect for him seeing him sucking up to Bush. Trouble is what's the alternative? Conservative? Thanks but I'll pass on that. Liberal? Do they still exist? Bad situation to be in.
- Vinney20
I voted green. Didnt do any favours for em but what the hell.
- konspiracy0
of the same opinion too - i thought that blair was ok when he first got in to no.10. but he's really shown he's a cock over the past wee while.
however, i never voted him in - i dont vote.
In the UK, parliament was set up so that individual areas/regions could have a representative speaking for that area in a time when communication was via horseback etc.
In a day and age where we have amazing communication technologies such as mobile phones, sms messaging and the internet there is NO need for these people speaking for us - we can speak for OURSELVES.
Granted, we would still need a governing body to discuss pressing issues and organising shit etc - they would post up on say, a website or it would be on TV - the latest thing for 'THE PEOPLE' to vote on.
"SHOULD WE GO TO WAR?" telephone 0898 ..... bla bla .... or text YES/NO to ...... or go online at ......
I realise that peoples power could end in chaos - and thats why i said we needed some sort of governing body over this - information is a very important factor and this system would have to be backed up by a 'no nonsense' and completely truthful information on the subjects - no propeganda - no bending the truth - and no half truths!I realise this is a bit of a dream, but hey, if we implement it we can get rid of these grey fuckers who are a drain on our taxes ;)
- mbr0
Don't forget that France sells it's missiles to Iraq, so of course they aren't going to go in. They fought in the first Gulf war, but never fly over Iraqi airspace. They get missiles from Russia, too.
So don't ever think that anyone does things for the 'good' of the people. Power and money are the name of the game, nothing more, and that's the same for every nation (that I can think of).
That said, I am beginning to be against the war too, but only because our economy sucks ass so bad now and doesn't look better, that it seems moronic to spend on a war. Oh, wait, Bush is a moron, now I get it. Duh.
- mitsu0
""SHOULD WE GO TO WAR?" telephone 0898 ..... bla bla .... or text YES/NO to ...... or go online at ...... "
there's a reason why you can't do that...
it's called security. i can just see hackers salivating over the oportunity to engineer this one in their favor.
you think the governments experts are better than those that don't play by the rules? you won't see this kind of voting system for a while.
- dstlb0
To work properly that would rely on everyone having an educated opinion on issues they'd be voting on, which is pretty unlikely when the public show more interest in Popstars The Rivals than they do in the news.
Nice idea though, just can't see it working.
- AD0
It's so sad when a couple of World powers step up and say that what they want is a "peaceful solution to the Iraq crisis"
and all the US politicians can do is dismiss it and speak of how this 'old Europe' doesn't represent Europe. I mean WTF how can peace be dismissed so easily. How can the US dismiss two big UN members who are looking for peace.
Whenever the US dismisses these peaceful solutions - I never see their reasoning for it. They just say shit like "bah - we must war - clearly Saddam wants to kill everyone!" - but why not prove it first - why not let weapons inspectors scour the country - I just don't fucking get it
the news just always makes me sad these days - I wish I could move to another planet
I'm waiting for the mothership
- vespa0
It infuriates me that my tax money can be spent on killing people I don't have a problem with (read as the Iraqi people not Saddam). I would much rather see my taxes go towards helping these people rather than killing them.
Now it is said that we may be using nuclear missiles against Iraq - the hypocrisy!! Isn't that the excuse Blair and Bush are using for them to attack - that Saddam may use weapons of mass destruction?
- AD0
vespa,
do you have a link talking about using nukes on Iraq?
if true, that's fucking crazy :(
- mitsu0
we won't nuke them, we are going to send in troops to go into the cities and fish them out. they know we won't nuke innocent people, so they use that to their advantage and hide there. this isn't new news.
- unknown0
mbr, there wouldnt be weapons of mass destruction if it wasnt for the US selling Saddam everything to back him in his war against Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini
- vespa0
Blair hinted on the 21st about using nuclear weapons if there was a perceived threat from Iraq. Well looking at all the troops in Iraq now even with no evidence to back it, I wonder how tangible a percieved threat has to be?
The US has used nuclear weapons on innocent people before.
- mitsu0
you don't send in troops to nuke a country.
- Nairn0
Thanks Konspiracy - that's a neat tirade for the ideas in my head I've been so far unable to express.
this 'democracy' we make such a deal about, that we export with such vigour and zeal - what's it actually worth?
we have the'opportunity' to squander a 4-yearly vote on parties conglomorated around a centre, and differentiating themselves none. If I disagree with specific issues, I'm powerless until they raise a media outcry, at which point everything becomes polarised.
THE WORST thing, is the cycle of blame. Especially in Britain, it seems. Politicians play the limelight and blame predecessors and legislation for all their fuckups. Case in point, the Millennium Dome. Beautiful structure. Scheme insitgated by Tories. Interior contents decided by cretinous politicans. Mostly Labour. Project flops - who gets the blame? The current holder of the chalice.. or 'no-one'
It's this short-termism of thought that I find the most worrying.
Almost makes me want to be a complete socialist...!
- Nairn0
You do [use nukes..] if you've decided a policy change and promoted massive investment in short-range tactical nukes.
Have to help industry develop these things..